Apple has submitted a patent application that raises some serious privacy and ethical concerns.
The US Patent and Trademark Office lists application 2023/0225659 as a “biosensing device” built into Apple’s earbuds to measure “biological signal parameters from a user.”
Which biological signals, you ask?
👉 Electroencephalography (EEG). In other words, the aim is to directly record the user’s brain waves from tiny sensors positioned within the ear canal.
👉 Electromyography (EMG). This records muscle movements and the information can be used to help understand facial expressions and jaw movements related to emotion.
👉 Electrooculography (EOG) tracks eye movements, particularly side-to-side.
👉 Electrocardiogram (ECG) typically measures the electrical activity of the heart.
👉 Galvanic skin response (GSR), which provides an indirect measure of emotional arousal – that is, the strength of an emotional response.
👉 Blood volume pulse (BVP). This is measured using photoplethysmography and provides information about heart rate (HR) and heart rate variability (HRV).
In other words, the aim is to collect a very comprehensive set of neurological and biometric data from the user. Creepy, right?!
It’s unclear to me how you could even record meaningful data from within the ear for at least of few of these (e.g. EOG, ECG, GSR) but that clearly isn’t going to stop them from trying.
In fairness, I don’t normally go around reading US patent applications, so maybe a large percentage of them are equally creepy – I can’t say. But this one feels deeply unethical.
It’s not at all clear, for instance, whether user would be aware that these data were being acquired and sent to Apple every time they used their earbuds. Even if their EULA mentioned the measurements, how many people would know what they mean or how they might be used?
Personally, I think there are five essential principles for ethical use of neurotechnology:
1. Voluntary. Participants should not be forced or deceived into providing physiological or neurological data. Volunteers at liberty to stop at any time.
2. Limited. Personal data may only be collected for a specific, explicit and legitimate purpose. This purpose must be clearly stated, and only stored as long as needed to complete that purpose.
3. Transparent. Requires informed consent including being aware the data are being collected and knowing the risks involved, including whether the information will be shared with other organizations.
4. Autonomy. Free from manipulation. Participants should not be forced or deceived into making decisions they would not otherwise make.
5. Valid. Must be based on valid science and led by scientifically trained staff.
To my mind, this application potentially violates 4 out of 5 of these principles (I don’t see any evidence of manipulation) and this makes me deeply uneasy!
What are your thoughts on the ethical implications of such technologies? Would you be comfortable using this device?
Chief Marketing Officer | DTC Growth Strategist | Advisor
2moLooks like we have a little more time than we thought but we still have to do the work: https://www.adweek.com/programmatic/google-delays-cookie-deprecation-for-the-third-time/#