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

Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 135 posts

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#91

Post by rooshdi »

dreamdu5t wrote: post #35
jellicle wrote: post #15

So the penalty for ongoing repeated lies and fraud is.... nothing. Zero. The FTC has investigated, and the settlement is zero money and zero penalties. Not one dollar. Whew! I'm glad they were punished! They won't do THAT again! The U.S. is really in late-stage empire breakdown. I don't think there is any significant enforcement of any laws whatsoever against companies and people that are reasonably well connected. T…

Privacy policies are not binding agreements or contracts. Facebook didn't lie. They simply don't have to follow their privacy policy exactly, since it's not a binding agreement.

Legality != Morality

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#92

Post by 1010100101 »

sunchild wrote: post #85
1010100101 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem here is the personal information is being voluntarily given to Facebook. And the FTC can do nothing about that. As far as I can tell, most people using FB are trying to communicate with their friends (as they previously did via letter, telephone and email), not broadcast every personal detail and thought to potentially any person or organization connected to the web. Alas they are not well informed that b…

Wrong. The FTC said very clearly that it thinks Facebook lured consumers in under false pretenses. That's punishable by criminal and civil penalties, in theory. The FTC usually settles these kind of cases, AFAIK. Sometimes there's money involved, sometimes not. Anyone who isn't in compliance with their own published privacy policy should be worried about the FTC; they can (again, in theory) do serious harm to a busin…

So are you suggesting that despite FB's rather sizeable legal budget and level of investment they will _still_ not be able to bring themsleves into compliance and stay that way? At least until the IPO. If Facebook even exists 20 years let alone 5 years from now I would be shocked. The data they've collected will of course probably have an infinite lifetime.

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#93

Post by dreamdu5t »

rhizome wrote: post #68
dreamdu5t wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You choose to divulge any information you consider to be private. Absent an actual formal agreement contingent upon giving that information (which an internal policy is most definitely not), I have no obligation to restrict who I share the information you chose to share with me. Unless you're going to argue that you own anything you happen to know, even after other people know it? Unless you're going to argue that a…

I have no obligation to restrict who I share the information you chose to share with me. If that was true in all cases, the story we're commenting on wouldn't exist.

How is that? Please explain how I am obligated to restrict information people freely share with me?

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#94

Post by rooshdi »

dreamdu5t wrote: post #50
Bud wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. They lied. The fact that there was, according to you, no binding contract, has no bearing on the question of whether they lied or not. They did lie. Case closed.

Even if you accept it was a lie, it's not fraud. Facebook "lies" like Subway "lies" about losing weight by eating there. You're omitting the fact that Facebook has always stated they may change what they do with your information in the future.

You're omitting the fact that Facebook has always stated they may change what they do with your information in the future.

Yes, but Facebook disclosed personal information which people expected to remain private. Your Subway analogy doesn't cut it because Subway is trusted to disclose information, whereas Facebook is trusted to enclose it.

Even if you accept it was a lie, it's not fraud.

From the dictionary:

"Fraud: Wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain."

From the FTC report:

"Facebook promised users that it would not share their personal information with advertisers. It did."

If that isn't fraud, I don't know what is.

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#95

Post by missing_cipher »

keenerd wrote: post #90
DanielStraight wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So... quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Perhaps the problem isn't that there's no one to watch the watchmen, but that we're over-reliant on watchmen. You don't need the FTC to keep Facebook from sharing your private information. I'm not saying Facebook did nothing wrong, and I'm not saying the FTC is doing nothing wrong now. I'm saying that none of it matters if you delete your own account. You don't need to worry about…

I don't know Latin, but I can play around with google translate! Best I got was Noli loqui et non servant custodibus or "Watch your mouth instead of the watchmen". I guess this was a very complex way of disagreeing with you that "none of it matters".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quis_custodiet_ipsos_custodes%3...

"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? is a Latin phrase traditionally attributed to the Roman poet Juvenal from his Satires (Satire VI, lines 347–8), which is literally translated as "Who will guard the guards themselves?" Also sometimes rendered as "Who watches the watchmen?""

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#96

Post by rhizome »

dreamdu5t wrote: post #93
rhizome wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no obligation to restrict who I share the information you chose to share with me. If that was true in all cases, the story we're commenting on wouldn't exist.

How is that? Please explain how I am obligated to restrict information people freely share with me?

In your example, in this context, there would be no privacy violation possible.

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#97

Post by rhizome »

ceejayoz wrote: post #77
_delirium wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They knowingly lied to their customers, if these allegations are true.

Facebook users are not Facebook's customers.

OK, Sheldon. Facebook knowingly lied to people subject to their privacy policy, TOU and TOS (where applicable).

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#98

Post by rhizome »

dreamdu5t wrote: post #50
Bud wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. They lied. The fact that there was, according to you, no binding contract, has no bearing on the question of whether they lied or not. They did lie. Case closed.

Even if you accept it was a lie, it's not fraud. Facebook "lies" like Subway "lies" about losing weight by eating there. You're omitting the fact that Facebook has always stated they may change what they do with your information in the future.

Facebook "lies" like Subway "lies" about losing weight by eating there.

Jared Fogle did lose weight eating at Subway.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jared_Fogle#Subway_campaign

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#99

Post by shibboleth »

MartinCron wrote: post #60
jpdoctor wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Utterly inexcusable. Someone (several someones really) at the FTC should lose their jobs over that. When O when will we get regulators with some distance from those they are regulating? (I'm looking at you SEC.)

Should government agencies who regulate telephone services not use telephones?

I don't think that's a fair analogy to use. While government regulatory agencies covering the telecommunication sector may indeed use telephones, they don't stick a recommendation to use Company A on their website... especially if they have just given Company A a simple slap on the wrist for an arguably large grievance. You may (or may not) counter by saying that Facebook is an entire market in itself that can't be ignored (which it isn't), but after viewing their Facebook page I see no additional information that I couldn't simply find on the front page of the FTC's website.

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#100

Post by jellicle »

DanielStraight wrote: post #69
jellicle wrote: post #15

So the penalty for ongoing repeated lies and fraud is.... nothing. Zero. The FTC has investigated, and the settlement is zero money and zero penalties. Not one dollar. Whew! I'm glad they were punished! They won't do THAT again! The U.S. is really in late-stage empire breakdown. I don't think there is any significant enforcement of any laws whatsoever against companies and people that are reasonably well connected. T…

So... quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Perhaps the problem isn't that there's no one to watch the watchmen, but that we're over-reliant on watchmen. You don't need the FTC to keep Facebook from sharing your private information. I'm not saying Facebook did nothing wrong, and I'm not saying the FTC is doing nothing wrong now. I'm saying that none of it matters if you delete your own account. You don't need to worry about…

Look, here's the FTC's mandate:

"Unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, are hereby declared unlawful."

The FTC exists to enforce that. Now, it's fashionable nowadays for the ill-informed to insist that government is worthless, but in fact this law and similar ones underly every aspect of American society and you owe everything to have to their existence. Without government anti-fraud efforts, commerce does not exist, full stop.

Private enterprise are the applications. Government is the operating system.

But let's take another look at your point: your argument is that I should right now go and delete my account a couple years ago because I know today that Facebook was lying a couple years ago. For everyone who has a time machine, that is a good remedy - it will solve the problem for those people admirably. For those that don't, we need effective government enforcement of anti-fraud laws.

Post reply on HN