A federal judge said Apple must face nearly all of a proposed class-action lawsuit claiming that its voice assistant Siri violates users’ privacy. As reported by Reuters, US District Judge Jeffrey White could try to prove that “Siri routinely recorded their private conversations because of ‘accidental activations’, and that Apple disclosed these conversations to third parties.”

According to the publication, one Siri user said their private discussions with his doctors about a surgical treatment caused them to receive targeted ads for that treatment. There were also other cases in this lawsuit.

“Apple faults plaintiffs for not alleging the contents of their communications, but the private setting alone is enough to show a reasonable expectation of privacy,” White wrote.

The judge said the plaintiffs may pursue claims that Apple violated the federal Wiretap Act and California privacy law.

In 2019, Apple was put in the middle of privacy concerns over voice-activated assistants. At that time, the Guardian reported that Apple contractors listen to Siri audios as part of its efforts to improve performance, and often hear sensitive conversations.

The report detailed that many of the things heard by these reviewers are accidental activations of Siri – including private medical conversations, criminal dealings, and more. Recordings are also said to include location and contact details as well as app data.

Then, the company suspended the program, and in a software update addressed this concern about whether you want to share your data to help Siri improve.

Apart from this case, even though Siri is sometimes triggered by the words “Hey” and “Siri,” it’s unlikely that this is the reason why you’re seeing a targeted ad on Instagram. In general, people simply tend to be more predictable than they think they are.

This is why Apple has offered ways to stop third parties to track you over Safari and now lets you decide whether you want apps to track you cross-platform or not.

If you want to learn more about this lawsuit, the case is Lopez et al v. Apple Inc., U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 19-04577.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Check out 9to5Mac on YouTube for more Apple news:

You’re reading 9to5Mac — experts who break news about Apple and its surrounding ecosystem, day after day. Be sure to check out our homepage for all the latest news, and follow 9to5Mac on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn to stay in the loop. Don’t know where to start? Check out our exclusive stories, reviews, how-tos, and subscribe to our YouTube channel

About the Author

José Adorno

Brazilian tech Journalist. Author at 9to5Mac. Previously at tv globo, the main TV broadcaster in Latin America.

Got tips, feedback, or questions? jose@9to5mac.com