An investigation by Gamers Nexus found LG smart TVs sweep local networks to map phones and nearby devices. Tests also showed the sets can capture microphone audio with the screen off — they then upload data once reconnected to the internet.

  • manualoverride@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Secretly recording conversations in peoples homes sounds like it should be against the law in a number of countries.

    Imagine someone working for the government, security services, or a defence contractor. I suspect LG may be in trouble with a number of National Security agencies.

    • Seppo@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      ·
      3 hours ago

      It is illegal. Unfortunately crime is legal for corporations. They just pay the crime fee and can continue undisturbed. Shareholders must be held responsible individually, otherwise it will only get worse.

      • Jajcus@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Not shareholders. Decision makers. Upper msnagement. Shareholders shpuld pay in share value (the finantial penalty to the corporations should be high enough to affect that), bu the personal an criminal responsibility belongs to managers, CEO in particular.

      • ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        Shareholders must be held responsible individually

        So, are you personally on the hook here because the company managing your pension fund is holding stocks in LG? Because that technically makes you a shareholder as it was bought with your money, right?

        Edit: not sure why I get downvoted, this is a legitimate concern/nuance to the debate. The managing company doesn’t own these stocks so they’re not the shareholders, that’s the people whose money they are managing, but these people are not directly in control of the funds. Who is the liable party in this?

        • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          47 minutes ago

          The highest level employee/officer who had knowledge of it should be held responsible

        • Seppo@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          42 minutes ago

          It doesn’t matter how many layers of evasion there are. Responsibility has to be with individuals in order for there to be change.

    • TipRing@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Recording without consent is very much a crime in any single-party state, but my guess is that the TOS that people click past to use the TV gives them permission to record you. If it didn’t, they would be in big legal hot water.

        • StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          32 minutes ago

          Consenting to recording makes recording legal.

          Making that consent required to use the TV or its features and it being buried within lengthy, opaque terms of service in a country with a low level of literacy should be illegal, but it stands in the US because it’s a consumer hostile country.