81–90 of 202 posts
The bigger question is whether the fine was less than the amount they made selling the location data.
The core issue is transparency. I don't want to see a 'privacy policy', I want to see who a company has sold/given my information to and what limitations that sale has. The concept is simple. If you collect anything about me and allow some other entity access, you tell me about it/make it easy for me to see -and- block. Most of this abuse of personal data would go away if people knew it was going on.
Everything should be opt-in. Burden should be on them, something like, "We want to share your data and if you agree here are the benefits to you."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But if we don't have completely unfounded attempts at saying "my side good, other side bad!", what political discourse would remain?
If we did away with First Past The Post voting, we could have more then two sides. Then it could be "my side good, all other sides bad!" Progress.
The core issue is transparency. I don't want to see a 'privacy policy', I want to see who a company has sold/given my information to and what limitations that sale has. The concept is simple. If you collect anything about me and allow some other entity access, you tell me about it/make it easy for me to see -and- block. Most of this abuse of personal data would go away if people knew it was going on.
> Most of this abuse of personal data would go away if people knew it was going on. GDPR proves this wrong. Most people click OK/accept even in front of relatively clear information (to be fair sometimes the options are "accept for you to be tracked and shared with 'our partners' or pay a subscription/fee", which is an easy choice for many.
"Most" may be correct, but given how annoying those banners are I would not read too much into that.
Sure would be a shame if someone leaked this guy's location history.
I mean c'mon it's just common sense that if your location when you place a call must be kept private then your location when you're just walking around not making a call is also private.
$200M is chump change. These carriers have been doing this for a long time. Nothing will change. At most, a footnote in the privacy policy will be added.
Shareholders tend to be unhappy with "We were fined for doing this, and so we kept doing it and now owe another fine."
Also, exec bodies/courts/juries tend to be more skeptical of an ignorance defense if a company was literally fined for doing that exact thing previously.
$200M is chump change. These carriers have been doing this for a long time. Nothing will change. At most, a footnote in the privacy policy will be added.
But how much did they make from selling it? The fact $200M is "chump change" because they made $200B (or whatever) is hardly relevant. If they made far less than $200M then they're going to stop doing it, period.
> "sharing access to customers’ location information without consent..." I'm not seeing anything here preventing the carriers from just adding "sharing location data" to the EULA / privacy policy that no one reads and continuing on - now with "consent". Without a requirement to offer a separate opt-out, this just seems like a temporary road bump that changes nothing in the long run.
>The Commission has also recognized that an
>opt-in requirement alone is not enough to protect customer CPNI, especially in light of tactics like
>“pretexting,” where a party pretends to be a particular customer or other authorized person in order to
>illegally obtain access to that customer’s information (thus circumventing opt-in requirements).17
The core issue is transparency. I don't want to see a 'privacy policy', I want to see who a company has sold/given my information to and what limitations that sale has. The concept is simple. If you collect anything about me and allow some other entity access, you tell me about it/make it easy for me to see -and- block. Most of this abuse of personal data would go away if people knew it was going on.
Everything should be opt-in. Burden should be on them, something like, "We want to share your data and if you agree here are the benefits to you."
Anything shy is begging companies to dark-engineer patterns around obtaining it.