Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

theregister.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 97 posts

Re: Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

#41

Post by wowzap »

antidesitter wrote: post #32
kevin_b_er wrote: post #2

Facebook played fast and loose with privacy for over a decade. This might have worked in the US where corporate abuse and greed reigns supreme, but not so much in Europe. And Facebook elected to move its corporate nexus to Europe to tax dodge. Were they so deluded to think Europe actually caring about privacy wouldn't one day come back to bite them?

Europe is just as prone to corporate abuse and greed. See the new Copyright Directive pushed at the behest of European publishers.

Seriously. Does anybody think GDPR is more than just virtue signaling so they can fine companies?

Re: Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

#43

Post by alistairSH »

nicky0 wrote: post #17
CPLX wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't have to ask a judge, they're not private citizens, they're the legislature. They are the government, and they have the right to documents and information. What criteria, exactly, are you using to distinguish between "laws" and "sneaky laws"?

It was parliament (or at least a parliamentary committee), not the government, that did this though wasn't it?

In the UK, Parliament IS the government.[1]

1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_sovereignty#Unit...

Re: Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

#44

Post by wtfstatists »

kitd wrote: post #24
londons_explore wrote: post #6

No government should have to resort to 'sneaky' measures like this. If you have a suspicion that a company is breaking the law, you ask a judge for permission to inspect them. If permission is granted, you show up at the main office and do your investigation. If a judge won't grant you permission do do that inspection, you drop the case entirely. None of this 'we used sneaky laws from centuries ago to take documents…

In the UK, Parliament is sovereign. FB had repeatedly refused to appear before a parliamentary committee to give evidence in the Cambridge Analytica case. Now, I'm not totally certain of the precise legal position, but because of its sovereignty, Parliament can act in a quasi-judicial way, so in effect, FB's actions can be seen as roughly equivalent to refusing a subpoena. FB's refusal authorised Parliament to seize…

You are basically normalizing violent response to a non-violent action. US can do that because FB is US company. UK cannot just because you happen to visit.

Please realize that other states are taking notes at this situation. They are waiting for US/UK/etc exec to visit and make the same excuse.

Re: Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

#45

Post by dragonwriter »

Eridrus wrote: post #36

Am I the only one, or does it sound like someone tipped them off? How would one know that this guy had these documents, and be keeping a close enough eye on his travel?

> How would one know that this guy had these documents

They'd know he had access to them from public information about his job and the relevant court proceeding.

Given the threat to use similar process on Zuck should he travel to the UK, I would assume that the Parliamentary committee involved has a way to get that kind of travel info about people of interest from the government, who, after all, works for and is answerable to the Parliament.

Re: Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

#47

Post by dragonwriter »

nicky0 wrote: post #17
CPLX wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't have to ask a judge, they're not private citizens, they're the legislature. They are the government, and they have the right to documents and information. What criteria, exactly, are you using to distinguish between "laws" and "sneaky laws"?

It was parliament (or at least a parliamentary committee), not the government, that did this though wasn't it?

In the US sense of “government”, Parliament is the highest body of government of the UK.

In the common parliamentary-democracy sense of “government”, the UK government is an entity subordinate to the UK Parliament.

Re: Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

#48

Post by eiaoa »

mattnewton wrote: post #27
nicky0 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was parliament (or at least a parliamentary committee), not the government, that did this though wasn't it?

That’s the gp’s point I think, the U.K. doesn’t have the the same separation of powers between government branches as the US. With some minor exceptions, Parliament is the whole enchilada.

> That’s the gp’s point I think, the U.K. doesn’t have the the same separation of powers between government branches as the US. With some minor exceptions, Parliament is the whole enchilada.

An example of this is that, until recently, their "supreme court" was a committee in one of the houses of parliament:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lords_of_Appeal_in_Ordinary

Re: Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

#49

Post by anpago »

dragonwriter wrote: post #45
Eridrus wrote: post #36

Am I the only one, or does it sound like someone tipped them off? How would one know that this guy had these documents, and be keeping a close enough eye on his travel?

> How would one know that this guy had these documents They'd know he had access to them from public information about his job and the relevant court proceeding. Given the threat to use similar process on Zuck should he travel to the UK, I would assume that the Parliamentary committee involved has a way to get that kind of travel info about people of interest from the government, who, after all, works for and is answ…

The UK is part of five eyes, if Facebook think they gather data..

Re: Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

#50

Post by yarrel »

stewartm wrote: post #13
lixtra wrote: post #3

> ... process during its court case against the Zuckerborg , in which it is alleging Facebook defrauded ... Seriously? What happened to journalism?

You either need to read a lot more of The Reg, or none at all. The Reg is written with a certain brand of humour that is appreciated by a fair chunk of its tech readership. If you want a humour free version of the article, checkout the link to The Guardian article cited. Brace yourself for lots of speling mistakes however.

Reading the original article that The Register is recycling is good advice generally.
Post reply on HN