There is a logic error in this email. If this is not a request they cannot claim 45 days to response. So refernce to CCPA 1798.130 was clearly just to scary.
I was part of a human subject research study without my consent
151–160 of 382 posts
Re: I was part of a human subject research study without my consent
#152We've had a wave of almost exactly the same mails (GDPR instead of California law) some time ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26845102
Re: I was part of a human subject research study without my consent
#153A lot of people mocking the author or others for being scared and worried are basically blaming the victim here, and I would like them to stop. The nature of legal practices in the USA is such that the answers to "Are you totally in the clear legally?" and "Will you lose significant amounts of money proving in random courts that you are in the clear legally?" are often both yes. As a result, any researchers who send…
I had similar thoughts when I read this story: how messed up is the legal climate in the US if a person who knows for sure they did absolutely nothing wrong should be scared by obvious nonsense email instead of laughing it off and deleting it? I don't diminish the ethical breach the researchers committed - they clearly shouldn't be inflicting any amount of mental anguish on people that did not agree to be part of any study. But it's not the only - and not the largest - problem here. The climate where this thing is seriously scary to so many people is really messed up.
Re: I was part of a human subject research study without my consent
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps you're making an assumption that "normal citizens" receive legal threats regularly? I can count the legal threats I've received on one hand, and I can assure you the days following them were, unfortunately, quite unpleasant (fortunately nothing came of it). Stress aside, part of the problem is the very real possibility of a subject wasting money on hiring a lawyer.
I didn't see a legal threat in the original email.
And I don't see what's threatening about pointing out that you have a very nice windshield, and that it would truly be a shame if anything happened to it... And that I sell windshield insurance.
Re: I was part of a human subject research study without my consent
#155Would it make sense to pursue a class-action claim against Princeton and the researchers to recover everyone’s legal costs and business disruption costs? Probably wouldn’t be that difficult to get the contact information of every business that was contacted during discovery, right?
Re: I was part of a human subject research study without my consent
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you reading some other comment than what you linked? I'm not seeing any admission of error in this FAQ.
See “Note from Jonathan Mayer” section - he apologized and took responsibility on the first paragraph.
Ah, okay, thank you - now I also see the "Update 2"; for some reason my browser had been returning a cached older version with just the Update 1 / FAQ added.
Re: I was part of a human subject research study without my consent
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
They weren't just asking questions. From the email: >My questions are about your process for when I do submit a request. It's really easy to read this as "I am going to be submitting a request." >I look forward to your reply without undue delay and at most within 45 days of this email, as required by Section 1798.130 of the California Civil Code. So I'd say there is some legal threat here.
submitting a request isn't at all like a lawsuit
No one said it is.
Re: I was part of a human subject research study without my consent
#158How did anybody think it was appropriate to distress random human subjects by sending what appears at first glance to be a thinly veiled legal threat?
It is sadly common for university CS groups to dismiss the ethical implications of their work as "anyone else could do this too" or "there aren't any ethical considerations because we're just doing stuff on a computer".
Re: I was part of a human subject research study without my consent
#159How did anybody think it was appropriate to distress random human subjects by sending what appears at first glance to be a thinly veiled legal threat?
How did anybody think it was appropriate to create a law that could create such distress?
When the legislators pass a law that is one of the balances they're trying to strike.
State funded research groups sending dishonest messages using intimidating references to the law to induce a response was presumably outside of the threat model.
Re: I was part of a human subject research study without my consent
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
>thinly veiled legal threats How is asking someone questions a legal threat?
They weren't just asking questions. From the email: >My questions are about your process for when I do submit a request. It's really easy to read this as "I am going to be submitting a request." >I look forward to your reply without undue delay and at most within 45 days of this email, as required by Section 1798.130 of the California Civil Code. So I'd say there is some legal threat here.
That code talks about businesses, and not just any businesses, but ones with revenue over $25M: https://oag.ca.gov/privacy/ccpa#sectiona
Random blogger who's not a business does not have any connection to this. It's more like if I tell you I'll sue you for murder, high treason and collusion with the Martian invasion, is it really a legal threat? There's literally no legal way for me to sue anybody like that.