MoviePass CEO says the app tracks your location before and after movies
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
The catch here is that no customers of theirs were given a chance to do so voluntarily. They purposefully misled customers so even though it's nice you don't care, others who do fell into the trap. That's fucked up.
If your point is more generally that we shouldn't be able to just skim a ToS and give consent, what's your alternative that doesn't destroy the ability of online businesses to engage in these kinds of agreements?
Edit: I'm adding this here because I can't reply to the comment below me by s73v3r_ 26.
You in particular might not care, but there are a lot of people who feel like these businesses provide valuable services and don't mind being expected to actually be accountable for the things they agree to. If you don't like ToS businesses online, come up with an alternative. Otherwise, unless your plan is just to go on a tirade, you need to at least try to consider an alternative to outright destruction or your argument is going to lose all of its persuasive power when talking to people who do value these services.
Why should we care about preserving one of the worst business practices of recent times?
Ok, its 11 pages, which according to http://niram.org/read/ should take 32 minutes to read, can be updated at any time, and contains such language as
You agree to indemnify and hold MoviePass, its officers,
directors, shareholders, predecessors, successors in interest,
employees, agents, subsidiaries and affiliates, harmless from
any demands, loss, liability, claims or expenses (including
attorneys' fees), made against MoviePass by any third party
due to or arising out of or in connection with your use of the
MoviePass Service or Site.
MoviePass's obligations, if any, with regard to its products
and services are governed solely by the agreements pursuant
to which they are provided, and nothing on this Site should be
construed to alter such agreements.
When you go through a law degree you have several subjects dedicated to "learning how to read a legal document". If it just required high school literacy, why would you ask very intelligent people to go through a literacy course in university? Because there is more to reading a legal document (such as knowing precedents in contract law, how courts interpret certain conditions, what the agreement means in the context of any related laws, and so on) than just knowing what the words mean.
This was always part of the terms from day one. Shouldn't surprise anyone.
Also while not specifically noted in the terms, it should be assumed they'd track your location since it spells out that you can only miss/walk out of a movie (if I remember correctly) once a month.
It is clear that this weekend was a proof of concept for MoviePass to see if they can alter the bottom line for specific movies and theaters. If they got positive results from this weekend's test, you can bet the data will be forwarded to every theater and studio in the industry to show how much of an impact MoviePass has and then it becomes an extortion racket.
This was all expected from the start, but it doesn't make it any less disappointing that MoviePass is now making that pivot from a company that sells a service to the general public to a company that sells the general public to other businesses as a service.
How is this kind of "growth hack" not simply dumping[1]? The only new development here is that dumping is no longer limited to large companies with large war chests thanks to the availability of venture capital.
The more interesting question is can healthy, truly profitable technology companies develop in an environment where they have to compete with startups that are ready and willing to undercut them by losing tons of investor money. I don't think the current status quo is good for the long term health of the valley.
"Dumping" is bad because it harms unsubsidized competitors. (It also pits foreign governments against private companies.) I fail to see who MoviePass hurt except its own investors.
> Can healthy, truly profitable technology companies develop in an environment where they have to compete with startups that are ready and willing to undercut them by losing tons of investor money
Lyft seems to be doing fine.
Games on the iOS App Store are generally free (or 99 cents). It is not profitable to recoup your costs by selling the product, because consumers will not pay for an app that costs more money than $1. In order to sustain this environment, the industry has moved to selling data, ads, and other sort of nonsense.
Let's suggest that MoviePass successfully "disrupts" the industry and then gets bought out or dies. What happens if this disruption permanently causes admissions revenue to go down, because consumers expect $10, and as such, movies to be substantially more unprofitable to make?
This sort of long-term "environmental impact" never seems to come up as long as we can pile more ads and tracking on top to make up the difference in unreasonable business models.
I'm quite the opposite. If a game on the play store is low priced/free and contain the "in-app"-purchases label I run far away.
It's a bit sad as some use this method as a demo with only a "full game" unlock in-app and I won't know. But I've been burned by that in the past, i.e. buy a full version without adds of a game and having the "full version" destroyed by adds a year later.
I'm generally extremely wary of buying anything on the play store now and have resorted to only using mail, signal, firefox with ad-block and my public transportation ticket app.. And the PS4 apps
Then...there will be fewer and cheaper movies made, unless and until consumer demand makes it profitable to produce more again.
This is like market economics 101, people.
Everyone who might have started a competing company but did the math to figure out they would have to charge more?
>Lyft seems to be doing fine.
Hasn't Lyft been spending billions of dollars without posting a profit just like Uber?
Point well taken, but in the case of MoviePass I'm not sure this is a bad thing?
I can see how it's a long-term harm if a value-adding startup is shut out by a competitor which relies on burning investor money. But I really can't work out what value-added startup MoviePass could be displacing; effectively the only benefit for consumers is the artificially low pricing. It seems like "VC money pit" is the entire story for this one.
By what measure? They have hundreds of millions in investor money and afaik aren’t turning any profit?
Investors in MoviePass will likely not make their money back. Or maybe they'll break even on a sale of assets to some major theater chain, if everyone involved is smart.
Afterward, future investors in companies like this will use MoviePass as another example for the fact the times when you could form a business mostly based on collecting user data is over. The stakes have changed, the goalposts have moved; Google/Facebook sized ingestion of user data is still very profitable, but now startups have to compete with that. So MoviePass knows which movies I go see and where I go before and after... Google knows where I am literally all the time.
They really should have started from day 1 trying to play ball with the theater chains. Theaters always made most of their money on concessions; incentivize upsells into that and get subsidies on ticket prices from the chains. Instead, they burned every bridge with the theaters they could have hoped to make. They'll pay for it.
1. I hadn't been to my local theaters in a long time.
2. I was surprised just how convenient it had become now that nobody else is visiting.
3. I am thoroughly enjoying this movie subscription service model combined with the lack of crowds at theaters.
I got MoviePass when they had that special deal at Costco, and have gone to ~15 movies (try to go once a week) since.
Maybe it's something like an introvert/extrovert thing, rather than a generational thing?
This is exactly why I don't like theaters. I go to enjoy the movie, not have a shared social event. The extend of the 'social' aspect is my wife or friend next to me maybe getting an ear whisper, but even that is rare. If I want a shared social movie event I'll go watch The Rocky Horror Picture Show.
Edit: I also grew up playing Oregon Trail
those are the things that keep me out of theaters. it was happening often enough to be an issue. (larger city)
I suspect if they do find some other way, it will be based on some relatively new technology (perhaps already existing, like smartphones, or up-and-coming like some kind of AR), or it would have happened already.
I've been trying to thing of a movie theatre / lan party combo, but haven't been able to come up with anything useful.
Their pitch? Pretty much comes down to good service including food and cocktails, at low prices, and a no-noise policy.
You buy a ticket ahead of time picking your exact seats. Tickets are about $11. The pre-show instead of being ads are usually short videos or clips from earlier movies. Food is around $12-16 an entree, alcoholic beverages are between $6 and $20 with most cocktails around $12.
Oh, and if they see your phone or if you're talking during the movie, you get kicked out with the option to be banned.
It's an amazing movie experience, and I regularly go at least once a month. Their food is genuinely good restaurant quality and their drinks are creative, often times with special cocktails or entrees to go along with big releases. It's obviously not an every day thing, but it's cheap enough to be a once a week kind of thing.
the whole package sounds great, but I would be sold on this detail alone. I hate having to choose between sitting in the theater for 30-45 mins and getting a bad seat at popular films.
They are currently breaking even, as their models predicted. Even paying full price for each ticket. Their innovation was getting Mastercard to issue and process their own card, so the movie theaters can't block them without violating Mastercard policy!
Now their next plans are to promote indie films and much more. I do not think they need all this tracking to make that happen. Also, Uber tracks you before and after the trip.
At Qbix we would never resort to this kind of thing, however the current movie theater model sucks and the prices just keep rising. And also the founder is the same guy who founded Netflix and Redbox! This would be the third time he is upending the movie industry.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/08/uber-to-stop-tra...
From there, the question is what to price the subscription at. It could be that revenue sharing on $10/mo with a couple added restrictions (No opening weekends) will provide theatres with more than they're currently making.
In Paris, there is a subscription that lets you access 75% of theaters (2 big chains and most independent theaters) for 20ish euros a month. A normal ticket is 10 euros. This has existing for 10+ years, and they didn't need a tracking app...
I had it back in the days, and the pricepoint was such that you needed to be a heavy user for it to make sense (at least 3 movies a month). Back in the days I was a student ands went to see almost every single movie, so the price made sense.
But at 20$ I would not take moviepass. As an adult, I don't want to commit pr force myself to 3 movies a month.
10$ is the cutoff for me ?(and I believe for most of the busy people), as I'm trying to go once or twice a month, for movies that I would mostly not "pay for".
Also, UGC unlimited is very different as it is managed by the theater chain itself, meaning that only need to pay the marginal cost of the ticket, while MoviePass need to pay the full public price of the ticket for each movie you go watch.
Just to be clear, they removed a handful of theaters nationwide:
AMC Century City 15, Los Angeles, CA
AMC Mercado 20, Santa Clara, CA
AMC Disney Springs 24, Lake Buena Vista, FL
AMC Loews Boston Common 19, Boston, MA
AMC River East 21, Chicago, IL
AMC Mission Valley 20, San Diego, CA
AMC Tysons Corner 16, McLean, VA
AMC Veterans 24, Tampa, FL
AMC Loews Alderwood Mall 16, Lynwood, WA
For most people, the impact of this is zero, but we'll see what happens next.
Fortunately, you just need to revoke the permission (or don't grant it in the first place) if you want to avoid being tracked. If you're concerned about this, I'd definitely suggest doing a quick check of the apps that track your location and disable the permission in the ones that you distrust.
It is one of the few app categories that can do that; the other is VOIP.
If Waze is using it for up to 40 minutes after traveling, you need to decide if you want to know where the cops are or if you want Google to know where you are.
I always force quit Waze at the end of the trip so that it (1) stops tracking me and (2) I don't waste my phone's battery life on tracking me
I don't see why it's surprising that MoviePass tracks your location when you open the app to look up movies or check in. Would that not be obvious?
I don't even install apps that request location when it isn't necessary for my needs (active geolocation, like mapping if I'm lost, hikes, and such).
For Moviepass, and for the rare cases where I am lost or really need active directions, I turn Location services on. Then, it gets immediately shut off. (Similarly, I keep Bluetooth and NFC off except when in active, intended use.)
In fact, for Moviepass and other apps that require locations, I install them on a secondary phone that I use only for nosy apps. It just stays in the car. (This is a good use for an old phone without a SIM; most apps will run fine over WiFi.)
And when apps want to update and in the process try to add permissions they didn't originally seek and have no business using (e.g. Stubhub, Magnifier, Flashlight+), I just don't let them update.
We're at the point where you sharing your data harms everyone else. For example, if there are 1000 people in a population and 999 willing share all data on themselves, the last holdout doesn't need to offer his data. They can already derive it from based on everyone else's.
You have to explain why I'm supposed to care that MoviePass knows where I am when I'm near a theater (i.e. why is this a con). You're acting like this is obvious, but it's not. All your work is ahead of you.
(Note: we all do this all the time in both explicit and implicit ways. We give away private data to obtain loans, we invite people into our homes and to view our bodies, we tell important secrets to build relationships. Privacy is valuable, and we use it like it's valuable. That's what's going on here, too.)
MoviePass knows where I am when I'm near a theater
The problem is that (1) other apps have Location access while you have Location services on if you have ever granted that privilege, including only at install time, and (2) few people have the presence of mind to turn Location on and back off promptly so that it's only on when the user is conscious of it.
My essential stance on data-gathering (and especially location data or communication metadata) is that it represents an irreversible erosion of privacy, and in many cases compromises the privacy of other people who never consented to share their data.
I've used services that (effectively) traded my data for cash, but I think there's a compelling argument that ill-defined location monitoring is underestimated as a personal risk and acutely underestimated as a source of externalities. This is up for debate, certainly, but 'close-minded' seems to presume the answer and deny the possibility of those externalities.
Because I barely value my location privacy, and I get a bunch of useful features out of some of the apps I let have it?
can't turn those off though on android
The market equilibrium rests where you can extract maximum value, if they can get away with tracking, they will do it, it has absolutely nothing to do with it being a fair deal or not.
The same way they can condemn kidnapping for hire while maintaining prisons?
Back when the US Constitution was drafted, there was virtually no commercial data gathering. So we arguably need the Fourth Amendment extended to the commercial sector. Maybe also the First Amendment.
MoviePass is a play to intermediate the movie-shopping experience, so they can extort kickbacks from theaters.
And to be honest, that is disappointing to me.
It is a different story if they are upfront with what MoviePass is using it's users' location data for.
I don't think many people care though. And even if you disagree on that, I think it should be their right to sell their privacy for convenience if they want to.
The change was probably triggered by Uber's creepy "we're going to track you for several minutes after you get out of the car" thing last year. Generated a lot of media attention and Uber has since stopped doing it.
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/06/07/ios-11-restrict-locatio...
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/29/547113818...
Ideally, I'd have control over the location data my phone provides at the active-app, installed-app, and total-shutoff levels. I don't actually mind giving out location data, I just want to know and make a choice when it happens. Fortunately, iOS is rapidly headed that way, and Android has made some promising moves.
I do think there's a slightly scarier conversation to be had about the externalities of "selling privacy", though. The Facebook 'shadow profile' situation is the obvious demonstration, but far from the scariest possibility. The possibility of building up a near-comprehensive profile of someone from other people's location, image, and messaging data raises real questions about what it even means to talk about 'personal privacy' in any public setting.
Then it also has to be a right to not sell your privacy for convencience.
Clearly communicate that you do sell my data to bolster your revenue and give me an option to pay more instead.
It's not a legitimate business model to simply not tell me that you're selling my data and then magically have lower prices.
Transparency of "this is how we are able to provide you a free app/service" could be improved, though.
No, but perhaps the government should ban the possibility of surveillance-supported websites.
And
People don't want to pay for apps with money, they "just want them". So they pay with their data. The problem here isn't with the transaction, the problem is people are in the dark with what they are actually paying with.
Companies are allowed to do this. Their TOS protects them.
And
That's it - a sweeping statement about a giant topic, and move on to the next line of argumentation...
You can't think of at least a dozen laws off the top of your head that protect your health or life personally?
Why don't you do what I did and put your money where your mouth is. Go back to using an old style text message only mobile like a nokia (other brands are available). It is such a joy to have a simple communications device. Do it!
The sad part is that AMC doesn't have an unlimited plan. Growing up in France I had the UGC illimite pass[1]. Moving to the US killed my movie-going habits from twice a week to maybe once every other month. Then of course moviepass came along and I was confused at how cheap it was. I mean, can't we have a regular pass for 50/month no imax from AMC and call it a day? Someone, either the studios, AMC, or me, is brain-dead and I can't figure out which one it is.
[1] https://www.ugc.fr/les-offres-ugc-illimite.html -- it still exists which means this business model has proven to make sense in France for at least 15 years.
Like maybe they could force users to write 500-word reviews? Or better yet record their faces so sentiment analysis algorithms can track users every feeling during a movie? Maybe ask users to spot product placement in movies - you don't get the movie free unless you enter every product spotted and write your thoughts about it. Maybe they could force women users to sit next to creepy men users who pay for that "extra service?" There's no limit to how you can innovate when you have no respect for your users.
MoviePass just set the price for your data; an abstract possession that people are barely beginning to value as an actual possession of theirs. The going price for tracking your purchasing behaviors before and after attending a movie is the cost of however many movies you can see in a month minus $10.
Facebook paid with a social networking platform to connect you to an unimaginable number of people you probably wouldn't be connected with otherwise. For that, you gave them your history and your super-ego.
Google gave you a map, an email, a phone number, and a bunch of productivity tools. For that you gave them everything.
The value of your data is holding steady or going up, depending on your perspective.
Also, MoviePass took a step in the right direction towards disclosure of intent when their CEO opened his mouth about it. Their TOS is typical, but the CEO is more transparent than most. They should be the brave first company to make their intention transparent.
Well, it's the value to you of however many movies you can see in a month, minus $10. That's likely very different than the nominal cost of all those movies, since MoviePass is likely to cause you to see more movies than you otherwise would.
My family almost always goes to the movies for a "family date night". Last night our concession stand bill was over $60, and that's just because I din't have a drink and we didn't get popcorn.
The theater we pretty much exclusively go to is one of those fancy places with the power recliners and food, so we will usually eat dinner there.
I know, this is choices we make when seeing a movie. But, I can't AFFORD to get unlimited movies for $10/month. :-)
My wife and I always eat first, then take a small snack in her bag and that's it.
Of course, we don't go to an upscale theater.
So it's against policy, but most folks do it.
The real goal is probably more like ticket scalpers... see how pricing motivates behavior and now demand can be shaped. The value generator would be either tiering the service offering or charging a premium for certain movies.
If they can demonstrate that flat rate pricing generates demand for movie viewing, even for shitty movies, they could buy excess inventory and give away shit movies or slack times and charge a premium for good movies or peak times.
It is almost certainly achievable. Back in my high school/college days I had access to unlimited free movies through various means. I saw every movie in the theaters from 1996-1999. We could get into hot movies the first week, so we watched whatever was available.
"Find Theaters and movies near you, and be able to use the app to get tickets and the theaters."[1]
There's nothing about tracking you outside of that purpose. Nothing about your drive to the theater, nothing about where you go after. So if they're doing that or start doing that, they should and probably will get kicked out of the app store.
Having said that, I wonder if this is true for their iOS version or just Android. The privacy policy in their TOS is probably sufficiently vague to pass legal muster.[2]
[1] On iOS go to Settings > Location Services > MoviePass
[2] "we ask you to supply us with personal information so that we can provide, enhance and personalize our services and marketing efforts" https://www.moviepass.com/privacy/
This is a really bad article, and I am shocked, just shocked, to see reporting of such poor quality on TechCrunch.
I would never do it of course, but I'm surprised nobody is doing it.
With no language addressing such tracking in the EULA, how is that legal?
Unless the government wants to make a statement by pursuing them, there is no recourse except public shaming.
Ah, is this how Uber knows my preferred pickup point near my condo? It's an excellent feature.
Mind you, my mum wouldn't understand that at that point she's the product. However, the ol' "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is" is something everyone should know.
I don't agree with MoviePass' approach - which is the reason I haven't subscribed - but unless it's blatantly illegal I think it's safe to presume they'll do anything to make a buck.
MoviePass is too good to be true. Let's not be naive. Let's cut back on the fake outrage.
The more value I can get circumventing businesses where the model is to collect and sell data, the better. I love the niche model of pay a little bit of money, get more value back and have the option to be tracked by a device that I control better than a lot of the shady "free" companies (facebook, pinterest, instagram, nextdoor, google, etc)
Should there be more transparency? Sure.
But even so, being naive is only going to manifest itself somewhere else. The Nanny State will never win that race.
That's a rather disingenuous way of putting it.
"The Nanny State"
That's an even more disingenuous way of putting things.
Android apps can track a user's location and glean potentially
private, personal information – such as where you work or live
– just by monitoring the internal sensors. More importantly,
they can do this without ever needing access to a device's GPS
or Wi-Fi permissions.
[1] https://www.wired.co.uk/article/android-apps-can-track-you-w...
Maybe it's just that Google won't feature you or something. But it should be against Play Store rules if it isn't already.
Edit: according to old posts on a support forum, it might ask for a photo of your ticket stub. That doesn't explain why it wants access to your own photos, which is a different permission on Android from getting access to your camera.
Maybe image recognition to see the kinds of things you're eating/considering buying before/after going to the movies?
This seems pretty reasonable to me. I consider it a fair trade for the monetary discount they're offering on their services.
I don't want to spend $10-$15 whenever I want to go to the movies. But I'm more than happy to provide access to my data and photos which I have no way to easily convert to monetary value.
If I didn't feel this way, I just wouldn't use their service.
No, the reason for accessing your Photos is to get the location and timestamp off of every one and build a nice little trail of where you are and where you go.
I cannot wait until the US gets a privacy law like the new EU one. Then they would have to absolutely justify why they're collecting that.
MoviePass is not a messaging service though.
If they ask permission for your photos and you give it, you live with the consequences. Or you value your privacy more than MoviePass and choose to not use the service.
The surprising thing is that the CEO admitted it so readily.
I'm surprised the USA movie chains haven't aped this (or even that Cineworld wasn't aping the USA chains).
Their business model seems more sustainable than MoviePass, too. Well, at least when it's not heavily reduced due to the Oscar promo.
What they are doing is illegal in the state of California.
Location-based tracking is totally common, and a serious business these days. This dataset will provide MoviePass with a huge and unique database, and they will prosper.
What nobody is talking about in this thread is that once they combine it with all of the other databases (profile, interest, etc), they will be able to track every single movie consumer from cradle to grave, from home to work, and on to the theater. They will know how your friends are, who you go to the movies with, where they live, who they know... this is all stuff that companies have been doing now since the early 2000s.
My point is that not only is this not illegal, it's relatively common. It might feel creepy, but this is the new normal. It's just not talked about very much. Google has a ton of this data, so does every cell provider, and of course someone mentioned foursquare, who realize that the location business was a better business than anything else they can build.
Also, the more we allow social media into our lives the richer these profiles become, because the qualitative data from social networks is the foundation of location networks. Where meets who meet when = datapoint.
In case you were wondering where all the mobile advertising revenue transitioned, start reading the T&Cs on the apps you download friends. :)
It seems cinemas are doing this already by themselves, for example Cineworld with its Cineworld Unlimited program for about £200 a year.
Love MoviePass!
So if you open the app only to check-in in the theater, they shouldn't be able to access your whereabouts before/after that.