Cisco backs down, drops cloud from default router settings | Hacker News Reader

Cisco backs down, drops cloud from default router settings

blogs.cisco.com

68 pointsboh12 comments

Cisco will not arbitrarily disconnect customers from the Cisco Connect Cloud service based on how they are using the Internet.
Cisco Connect Cloud and Cisco Linksys routers do not monitor or store information about how our customers are using the Internet and we do not arbitrarily disconnect customers from the Internet. The Cisco Connect Cloud service has never monitored customers’ Internet usage, nor was it designed to do so, and we will clarify this in an update to the terms of service.
Cisco Linksys routers are not used to collect information about Internet usage.

Cisco’s Linksys routers do not track or store any personal information regarding customers’ use of the Internet.

Ignoring all other aspects of this for the moment, I think startups can all learn something from this. Make sure you check what your lawyer is saying on your behalf. Putting "You agree not to use or permit the use of the Service: ...(ii) for obscene, pornographic, or offensive purposes;" in your TOU may help protect you from some obscure theoretical legal point of view, but from your customer's perspective it makes you seem malicious.

Ironically(?), the first thing you have to agree not to do is "invade another's privacy"

Do we know that's really what happened? I can very much see it going either way a) Lawyer put in too much defensive language or b) Cisco really wanted to push you into a new service.

Admittedly, it's a very different product and service, but can we blame them when they see companies like Facebook forcing their email service on users in such an obtrusive way? If I were a semi-out-of-touch manager I might think "The cloud is the way to go, we get more control, there are legitimate upsides to consumers, and anyone who bitches ultimately shuts up after a day of tweeting."

Seems like there's lots of precedent for them to think about trying.

I agree that this can be a meme within the business/legal logic. "Hey, if Facebook can get away with it..."

There are two separate issues here. It's clear that Cisco deliberately created the Cloud Connect service (I won't speculate on their motivations; in theory such a service could benefit customers) and deliberately auto-updated customers to it (which they promised all along). The TOS is a separate problem and appears to be a combination of legal ass-covering and deliberate misinterpretation.

"We believe lack of clarity in our own terms of service has contributed to many of our customers’ concerns, and we apologize for the confusion and inconvenience this has caused. We take responsibility for that lack of clarity, and we are taking steps to make this right."

Hey Cisco, what about having people locked out of their own routers? ( http://www.neowin.net/news/cisco-locks-users-out-of-their-ro... ) I don't see it mentioned in your non-apology.

This is an essential move on Cisco's part but the damage has been done. We should expect more of these. A friend bought a Samsung TV which wanted to download updated firmware from the Internet when she turned it on the first time. (it has a bunch of, IMO worthless, streaming features built in) With all the pieces there at what point does the TV accidentally 'brick' itself? Or you have a RandomBrand unit where RandomBrand goes out of business and the TV tries to download and can't so becomes worthless.

Eventually "no software changes needed" or something to that effect will be a 'feature' that sells gear. Or of course open software.

We recently purchased a TV for a short conference we were having. We didn't have much time to pick it out, so we picked out a reasonably well-reviewed name-brand television (my apologies, I can't remember the brand off-hand).

Like your experience, the device required an immediate network update.

Once the update was complete, I was astounded to see the television automatically download promotional advertisements and display them prominently on the main menu of the television, amidst the standard options.

If we hadn't required the television for the conference, I would have returned it to the store then and there. I anticipate that we'll see more of this in the future, and I don't look forward to it.

Cisco from the start should of made this an opt-in and not an opt-out (which in this case took customer pressure to even get opt-out). Whether they meant to do this on purpose or just misinformed management, they should of known from the start this was going to be a PR nightmare forcing updates which then require you to sign up for their cloud and their new TOS.

The part no one mentions is that Cisco advertised these routers as cloudy all along, so the firmware update just delivered the already-promised features. People who bought these routers probably didn't quite realize what a cloud router means, though.

http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless/wireless-news/31723-...

Did they advertise it as "locked until you agree to whatever agreement we want to force upon you"?

Everything has had EULAs for years.

People don't buy products after reading disclaimers or EULAs. But they carry some expectations as what to get from it and what not. If they later find a too wide difference between their expectations and how that EULA had been acted upon, they know what brand NOT to buy next. And friends warn friends, if only to save them from reading 10 EULAs daily.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com