Fakespot, known for its web browser extensions that try to weed out fake product reviews, suddenly no longer has an iPhone or iPad app — because Amazon sent Apple a takedown request, both Amazon and Fakespot confirm, and Apple decided to remove the app.
The giant retailer says it was concerned about how a new update to the Fakespot app was “wrapping” its website without permission, and how that could be theoretically exploited to steal Amazon customer data. But Fakespot founder Saoud Khalifah tells The Verge that Apple abruptly removed the app today without any explanation. Apple didn’t respond to multiple requests for comment.
Two abusive monopolists walk into a bar.
Well, Amazon could *technically* be correct in their complaint, but it does not make it right. Especially taking down an entire app, instead of blocking an update sounds like a step too far.
That being said, I went onto the fakespot web page, and there are some concerning signs.
First, they seem to strongly discourage the regular old “analyzer” (their name for the web application). You need to hunt though the “hamburger” menu to find it.
Instead, they try to get you to install an “extension”, or a mobile app. This was their chrome version:
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/fakespot-fake-amazon-revi/nakplnnackehceedgkgkokbgbmfghain?utm_campaign=amz_icon
And the privacy summary lists:
This is a bit too much if their only purpose was alerting you to potential fake reviews. Especially tracking your ID would be a big no-no.
And from their own privacy information page:
So, even though I find the abrupt actions of Amazon and Apple a bit concerning, I also find the recent changes in the fakespot not so good either.
I get they need to earn money to provide the service, and advertisement is a valid option. So I am not going to go on a full blame mode.
I’m certain Apple is within its legal rights to take down the app (it’s Apple’s rules, Apple has no obligation to make them fair or rational). But I’m not sure I fully understand the practical argument Amazon is making about customer data (I’m not disagreeing with your take sukru, but your post did make me question it).
Is the idea that it’s okay for Apple and Amazon to have access to “Amazon customer data”, but that as soon as they also become Fakespot customers, it’s not okay for Fakespot to have access to that same data?
Is the argument that Fakespot is gaining access to this data without their customers’ knowledge (which I agree would be really bad), whereas customers are fully cognisant of the data Apple and Amazon collect about them?
Is the argument that Fakespot is somehow inherently less trustworthy than Apple or Amazon (perhaps Fakespot betrayed customer trust in the past?).
Is the argument that customers (not Fakespot) are violating the contract they’ve agreed with Amazon by sharing their Amazon customer data with Fakespot?
Or, is it just a case of Amazon and Apple wanting to retain a competitive advantage from the data they’ve worked hard to collect, independent of the argument?
flypig,
I also thought about the hypocritical angle too. I’m not a fan of private data collection in general, particularly when it does not serve any user-facing purpose whatsoever. But this is what all of our big tech companies are doing, amazon and apple included. So what then would be the take away if small companies are prohibited from taking this information while the big companies make it an integral part of their business?
Ultimately I’m fine with banning these practices, but they should take a look at themselves in the mirror and apply the same rules to their own business. Of course they won’t though.
flypig,
The main argument is “who’s data is it?”, and I actually don’t like Amazon’s answer. I will come back to this later below.
Alfman,
There could be legitimate reasons for fakespot to collect data. That’s why I said I don’t entirely blame them. But yes, the situation is sticky.
They could say “the user has looked up a *5 star* item on Amazon, but learned its actual rating was *3 stars* on our system”. This is nice, but very limited. If they can say, “but they went onto buying an actual *5 star* item later on”, it becomes really valuable. Not only for themselves (they can make recommendation on site), but for potential customers of this data (hopefully anonymized).
But my concern is with their custodianship practices. There are many questions, and having the ID in the records is a big red flag (but I understand why they could need it). Also small companies get hacked all the time, but I have never heard Amazon itself being hacked so far.
So as a user I have some pros and cons.
For Amazon’s point of view, things are clear cut. The data is theirs, and they can do whatever they want with it, but only they can have this privilege. They will not share with anyone including the user..
They no longer send order summaries via email, since email providers (gmail, hotmail) could potentially data mine them. (Even though this is user’s data, and user’s email). They will data mine the trends and add new “Amazon Basics” products, but will not share it with competitors. They don’t even seem to have provide “download” your own receipts data for tax purposes.
I personally don’t agree with that. As I had a bad experience in the past with Best Buy when they deleted my entire profile. Without email summaries, I would have no access to my receipts.
Circling back to your point on the industry hypocrisy:
Yes we should have better and more open standards. Obviously I prefer to have data mining for recommendations. However, we users should know which data is collected, how long it is stored, what are the security practices, how is the insider risk prevented, how good is the anonymization, etc. Hopefully we will reach there.
[sorry for the long wall of text].
Thanks for the detailed answer sukru (I’d rather a well-thought-out wall of text than a throwaway platitude).
I tried to find data comparing the relative risk of a customer data breach between small and larger organisations. Intuitively I’d expect large tech companies to have better defences (lower probability of attack success), to be more attractive targets (greater number of attacks), with much more data (greater impact). Unfortunately I couldn’t find an answer.
Yes, this is the root of the problem for me. If we start from here, then Amazon’s statement makes perfect sense. But in my opinion the data belongs to the customer, not to Amazon. If the customer wants to share their data with Fakespot or anyone else, then as long as they’re given the info they need to make an informed decision, it should be up to them. The legal framework should be there to make sure this isn’t abused.
Alfman: I agree and only wish I could have put it as succinctly as you.
Yeah, this is one where I would side with the tech giants. Fake reviews are a real problem, but one only amazon can solve safely. I’m not letting a third party look at my amazon account. Heck no. Thats a terrible idea.