San Francisco: Don’t Fall for Industry Defense of Surveillance Pricing
The concept of “surveillance pricing” is just one part of a much larger problem and business model: corporations maximizing their profits by invading our privacy. The all-too-common business model is to systematically harvest, collate, and store as much of our personal data as possible, and then monetize it through use and sale. When it comes to surveillance pricing, that looks like corporations…
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has expressed concern over a practice known as "surveillance pricing," which involves corporations charging different prices for the same product based on a customer's personal data. EFF is backing Assembly Bill 2654, authored by California Assemblymember Chris Ward, which aims to ban this practice.
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors has also expressed support for the legislation, but has since stalled a vote on a resolution stating their backing after receiving criticism from the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce.
Critics of the proposed law argue that it could lead to higher prices for some consumers, as companies might use personal information to set higher prices. However, the Federal Trade Commission has found that companies do utilize surveillance pricing, such as showing higher-priced baby thermometers to new parents based on their residential zip code and time of purchase.
Privacy is a fundamental human right, and EFF opposes pay-for-privacy schemes where customers pay to avoid the processing of their personal data. Surveillance pricing is another form of this practice, where privacy rights should not be determined by a customer's financial situation.
Some defenders of surveillance pricing claim that it could lead to lower prices for certain consumers. However, studies suggest that the benefits are uneven, with potential losers depending on factors such as a consumer's willingness or ability to switch products. The accuracy of the underlying data also plays a role, but surveillance pricing often relies on false information.
The San Francisco Chamber of Commerce has raised concerns about the bill's compliance for businesses, but the bill is clear: "a retailer shall not engage in surveillance pricing." It also defines "surveillance pricing" as a customized price based on personally identifiable information collected through electronic surveillance. The bill includes carve-outs to protect loyalty programs and discounts, addressing the Chamber's concerns.
Written by urgent.news from EFF Deeplinks's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
