Facebook’s Data Deals Are Under Criminal Investigation

Post by cbluth » Thu, Mar 14, 2019, 6:53 AM UTC

sixtram wrote: post #138

8bitsrule wrote: post #136

IANAL. But this: "reports last June and December that Facebook had given business partners — including makers of smartphones, tablets and other devices — deep access to users’ personal information, letting some companies effectively override users’ privacy settings." suggests breach-of-contract. Just by creating those privacy settings, the company is 'saying' to (promising) the customer who elects to use them that it…

If it's for one user then it's a breach of contract, if you do that for 10 million, that's a deliberate act of breaching all contracts and that is usually criminal. scale matters on these issues as well. and if you are doing it as a big utility company (e.g. banks) then you are free to go :)

Post by TeMPOraL » Thu, Mar 14, 2019, 7:39 AM UTC

cmroanirgo wrote: post #78

godzillabrennus wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a movement starting to put ownership of data back into the hands of the people who created it. https://hu-manity.co/ Feels like the right solution even if the task is monumental.

I was all 'pro' this link, until I read: > Hu-manity.co has ... designed new intelligent contracts on blockchains which humans can use to negotiate new terms of consent and authorization with corporations so that inherent human data can be respected as legal property. It's great that people are serious about this, but extreme care should be taken with the latest tech hype! Blockchains are (by design) are 'out there',…

Post by thefucnjosh » Thu, Mar 14, 2019, 7:47 AM UTC

8bitsrule wrote: post #140

sixtram wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's for one user then it's a breach of contract, if you do that for 10 million, that's a deliberate act of breaching all contracts and that is usually criminal. scale matters on these issues as well. and if you are doing it as a big utility company (e.g. banks) then you are free to go :)

The bank I've long used is constantly reminding me that it shares data with its 'affiliates'. So I give it very little data to share.

Post by mic47 » Thu, Mar 14, 2019, 7:54 AM UTC

nradov wrote: post #91

mic47 wrote: post #6

Ok, so those partnerships were basically allowing Samsung and others to build Facebook app on their phones (i.e. allowing alternative client). Would this means that it will be criminal to allow companies to create alternative clients? That is really interesting development.

Samsung devices shipped with the same Facebook client app as on the Google Play store, it wasn't an alternative. The back end data access was through other means.

Post by IfOnlyYouKnew » Thu, Mar 14, 2019, 8:03 AM UTC

3xblah wrote: post #134

"It is not clear when the grand jury inquiry, overseen by prosecutors with the United States attorney's office for the Eastern District of New York, began or exactly what it is focusing on." What is NYT source for this story? A leak about the existence of an investigation? NYT journalist saw entries for grand jury subpoenas on PACER? How do they know the crime has to do with data deals? We must wait until complaint i…