To be fair, pretty much every government breaks its own rules, particularly when privacy is involved.

We have the largest and most invasive world governments in the history of the world thanks to the overwhelming technology that allows such a thing. And even governments that pretend to follow the rules just get their buddies in another country to do their dirty work for them. "I can't spy on you, but England can!"

the question here is, on it's face does an invasion of privacy constitute an injury? I'd argue that yes, it does. Privacy has inherent value, and that value is lost the moment that private data is exposed. That's the injury that needs to be redressed, regardless of whether or how the exposed data is used after the exposure. There could be additional injury in how the data is used, and that would have to be adjudicated and compensated separately, but losing the assurance that my data can never be used against me because it is only know to me is absolutely an injury in and of itself.

I mean how did I get checks from Google and Facebook for violating privacy then?

But that would mean the politicians would have to actually work instead of photo ops and promises!!!!

I've got a 2007 Kia that I'm planning to drive until I can't fix it anymore

So far that's proving to be a pretty easy given the cost and availability of parts

Really considering taking out a loan just to fix an old car instead of buying new.

I'm taking my 2006 Avalon to 300k miles and beyond!

Why risk it? Build your own with a raspberry pi and a touchscreen.

The scary thing? Define "new". This judgment is from a lawsuit in 2014. So any car made in at least the last 9 years is doing this. Maybe newer cars are doing even worse things.

Not a problem! Jack used car prices up to new cars, prevent public infrastructure and provide benefits for cars, all car manufacturers have similar privacy policies. Combine all three and you have customers that need a car to live, might as well get a new one if decade old ones are the same price or have no stock, and suddenly there isn't much choice.

That only helps when there's viable alternatives. Since pretty much all auto manufacturers do something like this it's not really a distinguishing feature.

And even if it was: how much worse/more expensive would a car need to be for you to not pick it over one that reads your text messages. And then ask the same question not for "you", but for the average consumer. Then be sad ...

When you connect to Bluetooth, it asks your phone to share call, contact and SMS information.

Think like the old horrible headunit text implementation, the ability to scan your contact list from the car, and see your recent calls.

Mozilla tested a bunch. Try a search on the platform and see.

Through android auto and apple car play would be my guess, but i don't know.

So if I buy a used car they can’t do all that right?

Right?

Illegal terms in T&C are still illegal regardless of whether you agreed to them or not in the US.