⚠️Article status notice: This Article's Relevance Is Under Review
This article has been flagged for questionable relevance. Its connection to the systemic consumer protection issues outlined in the Mission statement and Moderator Guidelines isn't clear.
Learn more ▼
If you believe this notice has been placed in error, or once you have made the required improvements, please visit the Moderators' noticeboard or the #appeals channel on our Discord server: Join Here.
Notice: This Article's Relevance Is Under Review
To justify the relevance of this article:
Provide evidence demonstrating how the issue reflects broader consumer exploitation (e.g., systemic patterns, recurring incidents, or related company policies).
Link the problem to modern forms of consumer protection concerns, such as privacy violations, barriers to repair, or ownership rights.
If you believe this notice has been placed in error, or once you have made the required improvements, please visit either the Moderator's noticeboard, or the #appeals channel on our Discord server: Join Here. There may be a discussion about this article on its talk page.
❗Article Status Notice: This Article is a stub
This article is underdeveloped, and needs additional work to meet the wiki's Content Guidelines and be in line with our Mission Statement for comprehensive coverage of consumer protection issues.
Learn more ▼
Issues may include:
This article needs to be expanded to provide meaningful information
This article requires additional verifiable evidence to demonstrate systemic impact
More documentation is needed to establish how this reflects broader consumer protection concerns
The connection between individual incidents and company-wide practices needs to be better established
The article is simply too short, and lacks sufficient content
How you can help:
Add documented examples with verifiable sources
Provide evidence of similar incidents affecting other consumers
Include relevant company policies or communications that demonstrate systemic practices
Link to credible reporting that covers these issues
Flesh out the article with relevant information
This notice will be removed once the article is sufficiently developed. Once you believe the article is ready to have its notice removed, please visit the Moderator's noticeboard, or the Discord (join here) and post to the #appeals channel, or mention its status on the article's talk page.
Car producers are forcing drivers to agree to invasive spying by locking them out of some car features until they comply.
Background
New cars with "smart" panels are forcing drivers to agree every time they start their car to sharing their information. If driver do not click Agree button panel is not usable, locking driver out of some features of car. There is no other option then to agree.
This is translation from Czech to English: "Do not use the unit while driving. The driver is always responsible for complying with traffic laws. There are connected services. Information about the vehicle, for example its location, is shared with Suzuki."Hyundai forcing driver to agree to spying on them by locking some features of the car.Link in the message: hyundaiusa.com/owner-privacy-policy.aspx
Consumer response
Drivers in EU have right to request the data car producers collected on them.
References
Add a category with the same name as the product, service, website, software, product line or company that this article is about.
The "Incidents" category is not needed.
Add your text below this box. Once this section is complete, delete this box by clicking on it and pressing backspace.
