“General Motors has engaged in egregious business practices that violated Texans’ privacy … in unthinkable ways,” rants state attorney general Ken Paxton  (pictured).

KP♡TX PII

What’s the craic? Jonathan Stempel and Ben Klayman report: Texas sues GM for allegedly violating drivers’ privacy

Who could have seen this coming? Thomas Hundal calls it “inevitable:” Here’s Why Texas Is Suing GM

“A reckoning has started”
Automotive data collection is a dirty business. Every day, thousands of people drive new cars off the lot, blissfully unaware that they [are] the product in the eyes of automakers. There’s money in selling user data, and … Texas is fighting back.
…
This could get interesting. … This all traces back to GM collecting driver data and selling it to LexisNexis, which then sold information … to insurance companies so they could allegedly jack up drivers’ premiums. While GM stopped sharing data with LexisNexis earlier this year, the true fallout of that is yet to be seen. Not only is this creepy as hell, there’s a strong argument that drivers weren’t able to properly consent to this use of their data.
…
This … feels like it’s been inevitable for years, because the world of automotive data has been the wild west for far too long. Oh, and since GM isn’t the only automaker alleged to have partaken in similar practices, don’t be surprised if similar suits start cropping up all over the place. It feels like a reckoning has started, and it may not end well for automakers.

You mean there’s more to come? Joe Warminsky isn’t surprised: GM lawsuit is Texas attorney general’s first shot in privacy initiative

“A potentially huge sum”
The lawsuit comes just weeks after Paxton announced that he was investigating several car companies … over how they handled the vast amounts of data collected by their connected cars. … Earlier this summer he created a new enforcement unit for the Texas Data Privacy and Security Act, which is generally considered one of the more consumer-friendly of such state laws. .
…
Texas … is seeking a jury trial and civil penalties of up to $10,000 per offense — a potentially huge sum considering there are about 1.8 million affected Texas customers. … The data-collection powers of connected vehicles have been under constant scrutiny in recent months, as automakers develop new technologies and data brokers propose new products that aim to maximize the information.

That’s $18 billion. I think I just melted my calculator. Good, thinks TheCraiggers:

It needs to be an order of magnitude more than they made from those deals. Too many times companies get slapped on the wrist for an amount considerably less than they made from their illicit activities.
…
Normal people who get caught doing things like selling stolen goods have to pay a fine on top of all money they may have made from selling it. Why aren’t companies treated the same?

What would that do to GM’s numbers? cdegroot has a better idea:

GM will just declare bankruptcy, let tax payers bail them out, and continue as they were. … How about just tossing the GM CEO in jail? That will end such shenanigans very quickly.

But what do actual Texans think? We’re waiting for the gift of sound+vision:

I’ve lived in Texas for 35 years. … This is Ken Paxton we’re talking about. … I’m willing to bet he isn’t concerned about Tesla doing it, though.
…
I expect … the suit against GM is a political stunt that he’ll let die in the courts, unless GM refuses to cough up whatever personal payola he’s demanding from them. … I’ve been waiting for him to do something for me, as a Texan, for a long time, and it hasn’t happened yet.

Harsh? u/RCA2CE thinks similar:

I have rarely been on the same side as our AG, [but] he’s right about this one—big time. … I have a GM with OnStar in it, this doesn’t make me happy to know.
…
Now my car’s not gonna start because I dissed it. … This is jacked.

Look at the context. That’s what fmajid seems to say:

In this case he’s fighting the good fight. Texas collected a $1.4B settlement from Meta for its facial-recognition scanning, and in this case the monetary damages to the victims are far worse—in terms of higher insurance premiums.
…
He should then go after the insurance companies who used this data next, and force them to disgorge the excess profits they made from the illegal use of data. Preferably with triple penalties.

Wait. Pause. veti thinks outside the box:

I find it kinda disturbing. Who even expects “privacy” about when and where they drive their car? I certainly assume everywhere I drive will be logged somewhere, by someone. [I] have assumed that for years, long before telemetry in the actual car was a thing.

Meanwhile, jonsonmac points out the next priority:

Please go after Toyota next.

And Finally:

KT HoL yay/yo supercut

Previously in And Finally

You have been reading SB Blogwatch by Richi Jennings. Richi curates the best bloggy bits, finest forums, and weirdest websites—so you don’t have to. Hate mail may be directed to  @RiCHi, @richij, @[email protected], @richi.bsky.social or [email protected]. Ask your doctor before reading. Your mileage may vary. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Do not stare into laser with remaining eye. E&OE. 30.

Image sauce: DonkeyHotey (cc:by-sa; leveled and cropped)