It has nothing to do with app permissions, thank you for noting that, I'll update the article later. It works like this: as soon as they get your credit card information, they have enough information to go to a data broker and buy every bit of data on you that exists. Now they know who you are, and so now they know when you get paid, your net worth, your buying habits. Likely they're selling data back to brokers do as the other person mentioned even if you're paying less for burgers maybe now you're paying more for airplane tickets or something.
Second, these apps may not have a tickbox TOS but they seem to have one of those implicit TOSs that I'm still not sure how they are legal, e.g. "by using this service you agree..."
First line:
> Important: Please carefully read and understand these terms and conditions (“terms”). They contain an arbitration agreement, jury and class action waivers, limitations on McDonald’s liability and other provisions that affect your legal rights.
It's a binding arbitration agreement that covers disputes outside of the app:
> any claim or dispute (whether in contract, tort, or otherwise) that McDonald’s or any Member of the McDonald’s System may have with you, or that you may have with McDonald’s or any Member of the McDonald’s System, arising from or related to the online services or these terms will be resolved exclusively by final and binding arbitration administered by the American Arbitration Association (“AAA”) and conducted before a single arbitrator using the AAA’s Consumer Arbitration Rules and, if applicable, its Mass Arbitration Supplementary Rules (“rules and procedures”);
> It works like this: as soon as they get your credit card information, they have enough information to go to a data broker and buy every bit of data on you that exists. Now they know who you are, and so now they know when you get paid, your net worth, your buying habits.
This is blatantly false. There are laws against credit card companies and banks selling individually identifiable transaction histories or balances. Financial datasets do get sold but they use anonymization and aggregation to say things like "people in ZIP codes 100xx who shop at Merchant A also spend X% of their fast-food budget at Merchant B."
> Second, these apps may not have a tickbox TOS but they seem to have one of those implicit TOSs that I'm still not sure how they are legal, e.g. "by using this service you agree..."
Right, but this really doesn't have anything to do with apps. These same kind of implicit TOS's exist anytime you shop anywhere on a website. Like you say, their enforceability is questionable -- just because they exist doesn't mean they hold up in court. And if you rent a car in person vs via an app, you still sign the same agreement at the rental counter. I agree that forced arbitration is a problem, but apps are pretty orthogonal to it. If you want to fight forced arbitration, then call your representative and work to raise awareness. Crusading against apps doesn't accomplish anything.
> then call your representative and work to raise awareness
Strongly curious why you believe individual action to protect privacy is less effective than calling a politician. Do you have personal experience with effectiveness in individual lobbying of the government? Or some example I can go learn about? I'm deeply cynical about influencing politics without capital or a cult of personality.
I said call your representative about arbitration, not privacy. Because arbitration is everywhere -- not installing an app isn't going to make much difference.
Reps' offices absolutely tally the subjects their constituents call about, and it affects what bills they vote for and propose. Obviously it has to be lots of people calling, but those are made of individuals. There are tons of examples of successful organizing leading to change. But yes it definitely takes organizational effort.
It has nothing to do with app permissions, thank you for noting that, I'll update the article later. It works like this: as soon as they get your credit card information, they have enough information to go to a data broker and buy every bit of data on you that exists. Now they know who you are, and so now they know when you get paid, your net worth, your buying habits. Likely they're selling data back to brokers do as the other person mentioned even if you're paying less for burgers maybe now you're paying more for airplane tickets or something.
Second, these apps may not have a tickbox TOS but they seem to have one of those implicit TOSs that I'm still not sure how they are legal, e.g. "by using this service you agree..."
Here's the one for the McDonald's app: https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/terms-and-conditions.html
First line: > Important: Please carefully read and understand these terms and conditions (“terms”). They contain an arbitration agreement, jury and class action waivers, limitations on McDonald’s liability and other provisions that affect your legal rights.
The arbitration agreement: https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/terms-and-conditions.html...
It's a binding arbitration agreement that covers disputes outside of the app:
> any claim or dispute (whether in contract, tort, or otherwise) that McDonald’s or any Member of the McDonald’s System may have with you, or that you may have with McDonald’s or any Member of the McDonald’s System, arising from or related to the online services or these terms will be resolved exclusively by final and binding arbitration administered by the American Arbitration Association (“AAA”) and conducted before a single arbitrator using the AAA’s Consumer Arbitration Rules and, if applicable, its Mass Arbitration Supplementary Rules (“rules and procedures”);
Anyway Cory Doctorow is way smarter and well sourced than me, I recommend reading his take on it: https://pluralistic.net/2025/10/27/shit-shack/