GM, edited by the author General Motors is still getting its butt kicked by the 2024 New York Times exposé that called out the company for sneakily selling driver data. In January, an FTC ruling banned the automaker from selling location data at all for the next five years. The latest shockwave ripple: the California Attorney General just secured a $12.75 million settlement over GM’s “illegal sale of hundreds of thousands of Californians’ location and driving data.” This GM data saga has been going on for two, or about 11, years, depending on how you look at it. GM started collecting driving data, things like speed, braking, and locations, through OnStar in 2015, but reproductions have only started rolling in over the last 24 months. This nugget from Consumer Rights Wiki contextualizes the situation quite succinctly: “GM has shared driving data from over 14 million vehicles (including 1.8 million in Texas alone) with commercial data brokers like LexisNexis and Verisk, who analyze it to create ‘driving scores’ that are sold to insurance companies. These scores have reportedly led to increased insurance premiums and coverage denials for consumers who were unaware their data were being collected and sold. Additionally, investigations have revealed that GM shares customer location data with law enforcement through subpoenas rather than requiring warrants, a practice that contradicts the company’s public-privacy commitments.” That wiki also highlights an eyebrow-raising detail: GM reportedly shared customer location data with law enforcement via simple subpoenas rather than requiring warrants—a direct contradiction of the company’s public privacy promises. After the afore-mentioned Times article exposed how a Chevy Bolt driver’s telematics was being secretly used to hike their insurance rates, GM discontinued its Smart Driver data-sharing program. Since then, GM has had to settle with the FTC, now the California AG, and probably soon the Texas Attorney General, too (which also has a pending case around this issue). GM reportedly made around $20 million selling data mined through OnStar, and it seems to stand to lose a lot more in penalties. This month’s California settlement is a new record haul for the Golden State—this is the largest settlement brought in over the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) to date. The way this particular saga is playing out feels like a glimmer of hope for consumer rights, as customer surveillance and data-selling seem to have quickly become a normal part of society (which sucks). You can count on automakers, insurance companies, and other adjacent corporations continuing to look for recurring revenue opportunities, so make sure you read the terms and conditions of your new vehicle’s convenience features.
