This month, many of the 80 million owners of Roku devices, including streaming sticks, set-top boxes and Internet-connected TVs that use the company’s streaming software, turned on their Roku to see a block of text. I, the owner of a cheap Roku TV in my bedroom, was among those stuck with the screen.
The message provided updated terms of service that made it harder for customers to take legal action against the company. If they didn’t agree, users were locked out of accessing the Roku menu and apps, effectively bypassing their devices. The only way to opt out was to mail a letter to the company.
For Isaac Phillips, a software engineer in Tampa, Florida, that felt unfair. So he came up with a solution to disconnect his Roku TV from the internet and use it as a normal TV without the Roku apps, which include Netflix, Hulu and other streaming services.
“It should belong to whoever paid for it,” Mr Phillips said. “To lock someone out of that completely doesn’t seem right. It’s quite unacceptable.”
Also this month, Roku announced a security breach that affected about 15,000 user accounts. The victims’ login credentials were obtained illegally through a breach of another company’s servers and used to log into Roku accounts to purchase streaming subscriptions, according to Roku.
“Like many companies, Roku updates its terms of service from time to time,” the company said in a statement, adding that the change was unrelated to the breach.
Roku’s not-so-good month has sparked discussions in online forums about what it means when a company can effectively disable the device you paid for. This is similar to how companies like Apple, Google and Microsoft can decide to stop releasing software updates for older devices, which gradually degrades their performance.
It is a lesson we must learn and relearn. Companies, even those that say they are trying to please us and make our lives better, are looking out for their own interests. In fact, the tech products we buy can evolve to continue to protect those interests—and the hoops we have to jump through to gain some control are often impractical. Here’s a reminder of what to remember.
We don’t really own our technology products
More than a decade ago, when we bought a TV, it was just that — a big screen that let you plug in whatever you wanted. Today, the vast majority of TVs connect to the internet and run the manufacturer’s operating system and applications. Even though you bought the TV, the software component, an important part of the product’s operation, remains under the company’s control.
Changes to the product’s software interface and data collection practices may occur at any time. In extreme examples, a device may stop working. In 2020, for example, Amazon shut down Echo Look, a camera that helped people organize their closets. It issued a promotional credit for owners to buy a different Amazon gadget that didn’t have similar features.
The less extreme, more common situation is when companies stop supporting older products because they need to sell new gadgets. Apple’s original Apple Watch from 2015, for example, no longer receives software updates and now barely works.
This issue is not new, but it has become more problematic as more of our devices rely on apps and Internet connections, said Nathan Proctor, director of the US Public Interest Research Group, a consumer advocacy group. With computers, consumers could modify their machines by installing a different operating system. But with many other types of software-locked electronics, from streaming devices to e-book readers, these modifications are usually not possible.
“When you get to the core of it, do you already have it?” he said.
Consumers are deprived of protection
In short, Roku’s terms of service have long required customers to agree to resolve any legal disputes through a private forum, the process known as mandatory arbitration, which can prevent consumers who share the same grievances from aggregating for to file lawsuits. The updated terms added language protecting the company from so-called mass arbitrations, where lawyers could file hundreds of thousands of individual arbitration claims, a tactic to combat arbitration clauses.
Mandatory arbitration clauses have become an industry standard. The terms of service for companies like Sony PlayStation, Vizio and Hulu include similar language about arbitration, and those companies also require consumers to send a letter to opt out of those terms.
Roku customers can opt out of the revised terms and continue using their products, but the process isn’t intuitive. First, they need to tap the ‘agree’ button on the terms of service screen. Then, within 30 days, they must mail a letter requesting to opt out of the terms, along with a copy of their Roku product receipt, to Roku’s general counsel at 1701 Junction Court, Suite 100, San Jose, Calif. 95112.
A Roku representative also provided a list of steps for those looking to use their Roku TVs as regular TVs without an Internet connection. It involves pressing a button or hole on the back of the TV to reset the software and skip the step of setting up the Internet connection.
Why is it harder to opt out than to opt in? Because companies are legally allowed to do so.
I suggest Roku customers follow these steps to opt out of the new terms and keep what little power they have. I, for one, took this opportunity to disconnect my Roku TV from the internet and plug in a different streaming device on less onerous terms, an old Apple TV. Regarding an exception letter, I plan to use the Chatbot AI ChatGPT to draft a test note.
Separately, Roku customers particularly vulnerable in recent weeks were the 15,000 affected by a cyberattack known as “credential stuffing.” Hackers obtained usernames and passwords leaked elsewhere and reused them to log into Roku accounts. The lesson here is to create a strong, unique password for every Internet account you have and never reuse it for another site.
The fine print: Tech companies are not our friends
Like many tech companies, Roku has touted itself as a company with consumers’ interests at heart. Its website, decorated with wholesome photos of families watching TV, invites you to join the millions of people who are saving money by cutting the cord. Its streaming devices, including the $20 streaming stick and $290 55-inch TV, are also relatively inexpensive.
But every successful business exists to make money, not friends, and Roku’s aggressive moves this month should make that clear.
With Roku and similar cheap streaming products like Google’s $30 Chromecast and Amazon’s $40 Fire TV stick, you’re heavily subsidizing the purchase of the product by sharing your data with advertisers, said Jen Caltrider, a director at Mozilla who researches companies’ privacy policies.
But Roku is a bigger offender, collecting far more information than it needs to provide a device running streaming apps, including information about your employment, education and religious beliefs, he said.
“Their privacy policy is a shining example of a terrible privacy policy for a consumer,” Ms Caltrider said. “It’s a company that captures data.”
