By: Caroline Burkard
Imagine talking to your sister, Anne, on the phone about wanting to buy a new jean jacket. You turn on your computer and suddenly, every advertisement is about jean jackets! You look around the room, wondering how your computer knew this information. Then, you see her; Alexa, her blue lights flashing, and you ask, “Alexa, how long have you been recording me?”
Amazon is no stranger to individuals accusing the company of illegally recording its customers. Today, Amazon argues that its users not only consented to these recordings, but also, that they were conducted under the cloak of its “wake recording” technology.
On February 25, 2021, two plaintiffs, Braunick and Narreau, separately filed suits accusing Amazon of illegally recording its consumers through its “false wakes.” Braunick alleged that the moment a person said a word remotely close to “Alexa,” the software began recording. These “false wakes” triggered Alexa to turn on and begin recording. Braunick also alleged that Amazon then stored this information with the intention to target advertisements towards its viewers. Additionally, Narreau argued that because individuals did not consent to this practice, these recordings violated Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 272 § 99.
Amazon argues the recordings are created and stored to better assist each customer. It argues that in order to locate an answer to a customer’s question, it must first store the recording, and then use its database to find an answer. Amazon also argues that when an individual asks a question like, “Alexa, play my most listened to songs,” it can access its stored database to calculate which songs its user listens to the most in order to select the right playlist. In addition to providing each customer with “optimal” assistance, Amazon explains in its FAQS that a user has the ability to delete each recording.
Like Alexa, Amazon appears to have an answer to every question. However, when Alexa finds these answers by recording its consumers without their consent, Amazon not only violates Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 272 § 99, but also the privacy of these individuals. When individuals ask Alexa a question, most do not anticipate that this information will be recorded, stored, and used for targeted advertising.
Amazon must not be allowed to continue to violate the privacy of its users. Consumers place these devices in their private homes, without realizing that everything they say or ask will be recorded for an unknown amount of time in addition to third parties accessing this information to drive targeted advertisements. Perhaps now that Braunick and Narreau have filed in the Superior Court, judges will have the opportunity to weigh in on whether or not Alexa has replaced “Big Brother” with “Big Sister.”
Student Bio: Caroline Burkard is in her second year as an accelerated evening student at Suffolk University Law School. She currently serves as a staff member on the Journal for High Technology Law. Caroline received her Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and her Master of Education from UMASS Boston.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this blog are the views of the author alone and do not represent the views of JHTL or Suffolk University Law School.
