Is the "poor, greedy EU is trying to make money by taxing American tech giants via fines for nothing" narrative still alive and well?
FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook
101–110 of 221 posts
Re: FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is the proportional hit though? You need to compare the percentage/ratio of the fine to the companies net worth and also to their annual revenue and profit margins.
Just because company is smaller, punishment should be lower? Impact of both leaks on average joe is much different, and size of penalties have it reversed
Re: FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook
#103Does it bother anyone else that Facebook is being fined $5 billion while Equifax, a company with a history of anti-consumer activity and privacy violations going back decades, the company that congress was forced to enact the Fair Credit Reporting Act to contain, and who gave away all the personal information for over a hundred million people through its own negligence, was fined a mere $650 million? Do you get the i…
Nope. Because fines are also based on companies' capacity to pay unless idea is to shutdown company and have majority or all employees jobless on street. So fines should be big enough to cause pain but not to cripple the company from operating.
Re: FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook
#104A lot of the terms of the settlement deal with organizational changes, but when you look at the very specific privacy restrictions that Facebook agreed to, it's really, really problematic stuff: * Facebook is prohibited from using telephone numbers obtained to enable a security feature (e.g., two-factor authentication) for advertising; * Facebook must provide clear and conspicuous notice of its use of facial recognit…
There's the pesky implication that Facebook was perhaps doing all that stuff. Making them stop is a win for users.
>the FTC alleges that Facebook violated the FTC Act’s prohibition against deceptive practices when it told users it would collect their phone numbers to enable a security feature, but did not disclose that it also used those numbers for advertising purposes.
>The FTC also alleges that Facebook misrepresented users’ ability to control the use of facial recognition technology with their accounts. According to the complaint, Facebook’s data policy, updated in April 2018, was deceptive to tens of millions of users who have Facebook’s facial recognition setting called “Tag Suggestions” because that setting was turned on by default, and the updated data policy suggested that users would need to opt-in to having facial recognition enabled for their accounts.
Re: FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook
#105What is the practical process in which $5B is handed over? Is it done over a timespan? Does it get tied up in courts for years and years?
Re: FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook
#106People here missing the big win for Facebook, which is retrospective: The FTC settlement indemnifies Facebook for "any and all claims prior to June 12, 2019" https://twitter.com/ashk4n/status/1154027557055975424
Re: FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is the proportional hit though? You need to compare the percentage/ratio of the fine to the companies net worth and also to their annual revenue and profit margins.
It should be based on no. of user impacted and avg. impact to each user. Revenue/Margin are should not be primary driver. We don't convict murderer/thief depending on their net worth (if any it is tilted on wrong side).
Re: FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook
#108A lot of the terms of the settlement deal with organizational changes, but when you look at the very specific privacy restrictions that Facebook agreed to, it's really, really problematic stuff: * Facebook is prohibited from using telephone numbers obtained to enable a security feature (e.g., two-factor authentication) for advertising; * Facebook must provide clear and conspicuous notice of its use of facial recognit…
> prohibited from using telephone numbers obtained to enable a security feature (e.g., two-factor authentication) for advertising Facebook is not alone in misuse or wrongful use of phone number given for 2FA. LinkedIn explicitly requires phone number to be added on the profile to enable 2FA and makes the phone number visible by default to all the contacts, if you don't want your phone number visible; you'll have to l…
Re: FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook
#109Re: FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook
#110A lot of the terms of the settlement deal with organizational changes, but when you look at the very specific privacy restrictions that Facebook agreed to, it's really, really problematic stuff: * Facebook is prohibited from using telephone numbers obtained to enable a security feature (e.g., two-factor authentication) for advertising; * Facebook must provide clear and conspicuous notice of its use of facial recognit…
> prohibited from using telephone numbers obtained to enable a security feature (e.g., two-factor authentication) for advertising Facebook is not alone in misuse or wrongful use of phone number given for 2FA. LinkedIn explicitly requires phone number to be added on the profile to enable 2FA and makes the phone number visible by default to all the contacts, if you don't want your phone number visible; you'll have to l…