Max Schrems is back: Facebook, Google hit with GDPR complaint Max Schrems, the thorn in Facebook’s side, has returned to launch the first challenges under the EU’s new data protection laws. The complaints, filed on the day Europe's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) comes into force, take aim at what he describes as Google and Facebook’s “forced consent”. Under the GDPR, when …
One interesting move would be for Google and Facebook to withdraw access for all users subject to GDPR.
The public outcry would be so vehement the only way a government that continued supporting GDPR could survive for more than 24 hours would be if the protestors couldn't use Facebook and Google to press home their grievance......
One interesting move would be for Google and Facebook to withdraw access for all users subject to GDPR. The public outcry would be so vehement the only way a government that continued supporting GDPR could survive for more than 24 hours would be if the protestors couldn't use Facebook and Google to press home their grievance......
Could be, but how would the Americans then get their intelligence on Europe*? The UK is about to step out, and ECHELON is becoming less and less relevant with the advance of secure message apps that carry voice. I rather think that Google will cough up whatever fine gets lobbed at them, and then knocks on the door of the NSA for a nice chunk of the gazillions annually sunk into the US espionage engine - after all, they're one of the major data providers.
But it's nice to be proven right :).
* Well, OK, apart from Google Home and Amazon Alexa intercept - if you didn't see that one coming you must be new here :)
Yes we are a net contributor to the EU, but as with most businesses you have to look carefully at what you get back, because with EU membership we don't get charged for some things, e.g. border taxes and crossings, as well as intangibles such as consistent and standardised regulations, so if you are a manufacturer and distributor of, say chemicals, then you know that your business doesn't have to worry about a different regulatory regime for different countries.
As we have been in the EU for so long, people have forgotten what non-frictionless trading is like, we forget about the paperwork and the lorries held up in customs because some plonker back at head office has not done the right form. HMRC hasn't forgotten and is talking about £20B per year of additional costs due to borders.
Now I know that the swivel eyed loonies exiteers think that this is nonsence, but if it comes to trusting the head of HMRC over Gove (no time for experts), Johnson (somebody who would sell his children for high office) or Rees Mog (who is still living sometime in the last century) I know who I would trust. Even if the HMRC estimates are 50% too high, that's still £10BN there.
So all this talk of £350M/week or £163M/week to the EU that we can claw back is simply pie in the sky.
The arguments of the Brexiteers remind me of the Climate Change Deniers, they find a single fact to hold onto and worry it to death. There't not a single credible piece of analysis that says we will be better off outside of the EU. Note the word credible, a pile of right wing junk from the ERA is not credible.
I have a feeling that this govt will fall before the end of the year and then all bets are off, mind youy Corbyn distrusts the EU more than Give does, but he might be a little more pragmatic and shouldn't be in the pocket of the NI Taliban, aka the DUP.
"The arguments of the Brexiteers remind me of the Climate Change Deniers, they find a single fact to hold onto and worry it to death. "
The climate change deniers are so loud and have so much politictal clout that they've forced pretty much all climate change estimates to be extremely conservative.
The reality of climate change is looking to be far _far_ worse than science has been predicting since the naysayers started their campaigns and virtually exactly on track of the near-worst case scenarios put forward in the 1990s before the vested interests started funding the naysayers to shout the science down.
Sea level rise is the least of the worries in things to come. Ocean food chain collapse and reduction in oxygen levels are likely to happen sooner.
people have forgotten what non-frictionless trading is like, we forget about the paperwork
That's weird. You mean the UK doesn't trade outside of the EU at the moment?
I must be getting old, I could have sworn we have global trading relationships. Maybe the new EU one could work like the ones we have with China, or America, or Canada, or Australia, or Papua New Guinea.
There't not a single credible piece of analysis that says we will be better off outside of the EU.
What makes you think I care about whether we're better off? The economy wasn't the primary factor in my preference to leave the EU.
@ Cederic "What makes you think I care about whether we're better off? The economy wasn't the primary factor in my preference to leave the EU."
Makes a refreshing change from the usual person who voted brexit for racist reasons but claimed it was for economy reasons
"You mean the UK doesn't trade outside of the EU at the moment?"
1: Not markets that can be accessed via lorry
2: Have you had to deal with customs delays due to paperwork when your goods are on the docks? The parking fee structures for containers ensure it gets very expensive very quickly, so there's strong incentive to get it right before the ship arrives.
"Yes we are a net contributor to the EU"
So as stated, it costs us £160 million a week net in cash terms. The Brexit bus rather misleadingly said that "we send Brussels £350M a week" which is true, but rather naughtily didn't mention that we get about £190M a week back in net benefits.
As with most businesses you have to look carefully at what you get back, because with EU membership we don't get charged for some things, e.g. border taxes and crossings, as well as intangibles such as consistent and standardised regulations, so if you are a manufacturer and distributor of, say chemicals, then you know that your business doesn't have to worry about a different regulatory regime for different countries."
We will be free to negotiate similar agreements with the rest of the planet. And we can retain / adopt regulations that make sense and ditch those that have a greater cost than benefit to us.
F**book and G00G still have 13 years cut-n-paste from COPPA in their T&Cs.
That is invalid in Europe. A minor cannot consent to their data being processed without written parental consent of at least one parent, usually both parents/guardians until they have reached the age of full legal responsibility - between 16 and 18 depending on which country.
He should add that one too. Just for laughs if not for any other reasons. If he does not have a suitable offspring to file the complaint, I am sure the el-reg readership can give their kids some interesting ideas who to talk to on this one.
I'm planning on hitting Whatsapp and Facebook myself for shadow profiles. I've never used their services but I know they've slurped my e-mail address and other details from my other half's phone (she uses Whatsapp unfortunately) and friend's Facebook accounts.
So I'm going to ask them to delete my data. And then refuse to provide any identifying data (because what would be the point of providing them data I explicitly don't want them to have?). Then asking them to just delete all data they don't have explicit opt-in consent to hold, on the grounds that my data will be in there somewhere and that's the only way to ensure that they successfully delete it without being able to personally identify me.
I'm strongly considering investing in metaphorical popcorn futures. Seems like a booming market.
"So I'm going to ask them to delete my data. And then refuse to provide any identifying data (because what would be the point of providing them data I explicitly don't want them to have?). "
Dear israel_hands,
We have deleted all our data on you. (This email was generated before we did that, sent on successful completion of the task, and was not been copied to our "Sent" folder.)
Obviously there is no way for us or you to prove that this is the case, because all the evidence is gone, but we've done it. Happy?
Love, Facebook.
"Exactly! If a user des not want his data stored, how do you ensure that???"
Easy: Under GDPR you only store the data of those who have given explicit consent for their data to be stored.
Consent is not fungible (meaning someone else cannot consent on your behalf), so all of those contract terms in the T&C where "you confirm you have permission to share someone else's details" have zero legal validity.
The next step along the GDPR path will be for someone to challenge those clauses and attempt to get the T&C declared void.
He may also wish to ask WhatsApp why they are not enforcing their terms and services. Because I suspect that the majority of their users are in violation of the following:
Address Book. You provide us the phone numbers of WhatsApp users and your other contacts in your mobile phone address book on a regular basis. You confirm you are authorized to provide us such numbers to allow us to provide our Services.
There is a digital age of consent provided for in the GDPR with has nothing to do with the age of full legal maturity as you put it. It is up to each country to set their own age of consent, between 13 & 16, but it's 16 by default.
They are mapped out here - https://www.betterinternetforkids.eu/web/portal/practice/awareness/detail?articleId=3017751
There is a digital age of consent provided for in the GDPR
Thanks for pointing it - I overlooked it when scanning through GDPR a while back.
However, this makes things even more interesting. Prior to GDPR it was the legal major age which is 16-18 in most countries so there is a good case for historic enforcement.
With GDPR setting it to 16 unless specifically lowered, the cut-n-paste from COPPA in USAsian company terms is still illegal everywhere except Estonia which is the only one to both go for 13 years and actually enact them.
Because nobody is forcing you to use these services...
If you don't agree to their terms and conditions then don't use them...
If you DO wan't to use them then part of the deal is that you have to agree to their terms...
This guy seems to want his cake and eat it too !
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
