Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Ordered To End Its Real Name Policy In Germany
An anonymous reader writes with a blow to Facebook's policy banning accounts under pseudonyms. From the article: "A German privacy regulator ordered Facebook to stop enforcing its real name policy because it violates a German law that gives users the right to use nicknames online. 'We believe the orders are without merit, a waste of German taxpayers' money and we will fight it vigorously,' a Facebook spokeswoman said in an emailed statement."
Sounds like someone that has a complete lack of respect for the law in general. "We don't agree with the law, we don't want you trying to enforce the law on us, and we're going to fight it even though it's law."
I do hope the German court decides to haul them out back behind the woodshed and explain how legislature, laws, and law enforcement work.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Any accounts set up under fake names will be removed from the site when discovered in order to keep the community safe, according to Facebook.
How does this keep community safe? Facebook is not a dating site.
It makes the CIA's job much more difficult with nicknames to spy on foreigners.
I have a solution that is plain and fair for everyone:
Stop Using Facebook!
About 10% of my associates use fake names or pseudonyms on The Facebook with no consequences. What's stopping everyone else?
When will USA do the same? :P
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Seems like it's hurting Facebook's personal information sales... But good for them trying to fight the law; at least they have enough balls to say that they're unhappy with it. It sure beats all the worthless arguments people get into online who don't actually ever bother to do anything about it. That includes all the people who complain about Facebook's privacy policy/business model/etc but still use the damned thing.
I gave up on Facebook many years ago, but I've got their back on this one. People may have the right to use nicknames on the internet, but they certainly don't have the right to be on Facebook. Follow the rules or get lost.
Whether their policy is sound is another issue.
The law gives you the right to use pseudonyms online without being prosecuted for it. If a service provider decides that you can use its service only with your real name, that does not violate the law. You can always use a different service provider. Really, it's ridiculous what the governments are trying to regulate nowadays...
http://www.cgerli.org/fileadmin/user_upload/interne_Dokumente/Legislation/Telemedia_Act__TMA_.pdf
The important section is 13.6:
The service provider must enable the use of telemedia and payment for them to occur
anonymously or via a pseudonym where this is technically possible and reasonable. The
recipient of the service is to be informed about this possibility.
(emphasis mine)
Since it's obviously technically possible, Facebook will have to argue that it's unreasonable.
(A week later...)
Neither Weichert nor Facebook's privacy officers would comment on the record, but a member of the ULD who wished to stay anonymous said "We're glad we could come to this agreement. Facebook is a wonderful free service. We hope to continue to...accommodate this...wonderful...free service," as he caressed his monitor and looked over deposits to his bank accounts.
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
Those darned privacy laws... Gruss How is poor Facebook supposed to properly monetize its members, if they are allowed to hide their identities?
That the one thing missing from the US Constitution: an explicit right to privacy.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
Facebook is not a dating site.
Facebook is very heavily used as a dating site.
One of the big questions is: what's in a name? What is someone's real name? When you introduce yourself to someone, you give a name. Is that your real name? Everyone will assume it is, without questioning it. But as a matter of fact I know people that go around by a nickname instead of their real name - usually a shorthand of their actual name, that they don't like, but a nickname nonetheless. A friend of mine once called me, introducing herself with her real name (which I heard before but never use - we always used a nickname), and basically I recognised her mostly by voice. The name on her passport is not the name her friends know best.
In Hong Kong it's even more so: all the locals have a Chinese name, written surname first - which sites like Facebook tend to mess up as they use the Western format of given name first. Many also go by an English name, which they actually use mostly in daily life, yet many never bother to register that English name on their passports. That makes it a nickname, yet also the name friends and business associate will know first and foremost.
For myself as my surname tends to be nearly impossible to pronounce for the locals, I usually just give them my first name to address me. That's hard enough to pronounce for them. And many will use that as were it my last name (adding "mister" in front). And for e.g. writing cheques, I must add my middle name as well - a name that I normally never use.
Then there is the issue of many people carrying the same name. My name is relatively unique do to a fairly rare surname, and my first name was not used much in my generation. So you see a name, but is that the John Doe you know from the bar, or another John Doe?
And finally names can be changed, legally, at will. Kim Dotcom from Megaupload fame is an example, and recently on Slashdot the mention of an American man who sold his name to the highest bidder, and for the next year he'll go by another name before assuming his original name again (or taking on yet another name).
It all comes down to a name being just a label, a way to recognise a person. Whether that label is the same as in that person's passport, that's not so relevant to their friends. They know a guy called "Bill", even when it says "William" in their passports. The argument that names must be "real names" to have people find their friends online, breaks down badly in those cases. A person is who they say they are, and no legal document or whatever is going to change that.
Wolfe schlegel stein hausen berger dorff vor altern warenge wissenhaft schafers wessen schafewaren wohlgepflege und sorgfaltig keit beschut zenvonangreifendurchihr raub gierig feinde welchevor alt ern zwolft aus endjahresvorandieer scheinen wanderer steer demen schder raum schiffge brauch lich talsseinurs prungvonkraft gestart sein lange fahrthin zwischenstern artigraum aufder suche nach die stern welchege habt bewohn bar planeten kreise drehen sich und wohinder neurassevonverstandig mensch lich keit konnte fort planze nund sicher freuen anlebenslanglich freudeundruhe mit nicht ein furcht voran greif envon anderer intelligentgeschopfsvonhinzwischensternartigraum
Apologies for the spaces, but Slashdot's filter error is defiling my name.
For that, I shall sue.
Facebook's real name policy complies with European data protection principles and Irish law, according to the social network.
Oh, well then, as long as it complies there, I guess it doesn't matter if it doesn't comply elsewhere.
Ahem. I know of one user who lists their names "Anal Medusa", an anagram of their legit name.
Does anyone really think that more than 70% of names on Facebook are for real?
Three Squirrels
To put you on track with my opinions on Facebook: I feel no desire to use it, it's a self maintaining address book for me. Now, I'm really wondering what gives Germany the right to say Facebook should allow nicknames, since when is it a users right to use Facebook by law? Is there a facebook.de? hosted in germany for germans? I dont think so. you use Facebook on free will on terms they define... you don't like it, go somewhere else!
"Hello Facebook, my name is Hans. Hans Steiner. Yes, even though I'm a woman. My parents hated me."
For every single new signup.
That'll fix 'em.
Wolfe schlegel stein hausen berger dorff vor altern warenge wissenhaft schafers wessen schafewaren wohlgepflege und sorgfaltig keit beschut zenvonangreifendurchihr raub gierig feinde welchevor alt ern zwolft aus endjahresvorandieer scheinen wanderer steer demen schder raum schiffge brauch lich talsseinurs prungvonkraft gestart sein lange fahrthin zwischenstern artigraum aufder suche nach die stern welchege habt bewohn bar planeten kreise drehen sich und wohinder neurassevonverstandig mensch lich keit konnte fort planze nund sicher freuen anlebenslanglich freudeundruhe mit nicht ein furcht voran greif envon anderer intelligentgeschopfsvonhinzwischensternartigraum
I had a cousin by that name, but we lost touch... Are you the Wolfe schlegel stein hausen berger dorff vor altern warenge wissenhaft schafers wessen schafewaren wohlgepflege und sorgfaltig keit beschut zenvonangreifendurchihr raub gierig feinde welchevor alt ern zwolft aus endjahresvorandieer scheinen wanderer steer demen schder raum schiffge brauch lich talsseinurs prungvonkraft gestart sein lange fahrthin zwischenstern artigraum aufder suche nach die stern welchege habt bewohn bar planeten kreise drehen sich und wohinder neurassevonverstandig mensch lich keit konnte fort planze nund sicher freuen anlebenslanglich freudeundruhe mit nicht ein furcht voran greif envon anderer intelligentgeschopfsvonhinzwischensternartigraum who used to live down the road from an abandoned POW camp near Hammelburg?
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
Facebook is not a required service. Nobody has to use it. Users are not paying for it.
I do not understand why Facebook should have to do anything. I think Germany telling a web site owner/developer that they have to make their system work a particular way is wrong. If Germans do not like sharing their real name online, then Germans should not join Facebook. Simple! How is it Facebook's problem that Germans want a feature that Facebook does not support?
I think it is great that Germany is trying to be on the cutting edge of protecting the privacy of its citizens; but this looks like another example of government over-reach. As a developer, I believe that I should be free to create websites, applications, etc. as I see fit.
Merry Christmas!
Sounds like someone that has a complete lack of respect for the law in general. "We don't agree with the law, we don't want you trying to enforce the law on us, and we're going to fight it even though it's law."
Yes, it is disregard for the law. And it is an attempt to manipulate the public opinion in their favor.
But the really funny thing is how unadjusted to the German market their spokesdroids are.
The argument "waste of taxpayers' money" is corporate propaganda used in the US. If government funds a law that provides oversight, it is "waste of taxpayers' money", if however things get funded by "private donations" politicians ought to be praised. (The latter is called corruption in other countries.)
In Germany people expect government to fund and enforce laws. The attitude is more like: I paid for it, I expect good service. So FB basically shot itself in the foot by claiming that government did its job.
- They should have used the "anonymity helps online predators" argument, since that one works in Germany too.
I imagine that Thilo has already unfriended Mark. Just wonder how much longer Thilo will have a profile? Though looks like his account is rather bereft of any content in the true German minimalist tradition, so just maybe it is just a doppelganger dupe profile, who knows.
Germans bureaucrats and law makers seem to be getting really up in arms at both Google and Facebook now that Microsoft has paid them off enough like the way they do in the States.
This is just another sponsored attack and you can bet that Microsoft is somewhere not to deep in the background egging on the German politicians with the usual grease. How else could the Germans have lost their minds and allowed ridiculous American software patents to stand.
Attacking Facebook and Google in the US would be suicide for Microsoft but as usual they are just doing it where a small amount of grease will get the biggest results. Germany has become the Utah and West Texas of Europe, shame on them! Angela Merkel is nothing more than a sheep in wolves' clothing. Same as Stephen Harper in Canada. No balls at all but at least Merkel has a real excuse.
facebook is NOT an "open" forum.
read the terms of service, educate yourself. would you consider a forum an "open" one if it forbid participation by those unfortunate youngsters who had a relationship over one of the famous age lines? what if you pissed on a bush and bought yourself a "sexual offender" label? What if you "sexted" an image of yourself to your sig/other? still "open" in your estimation? if so, you're a total dunce.
facebook is more like a parody of "open"; they limit membership, they censor photographs, they insist those who need anonymity be exposed to those who threaten them, and then they sell you to the highest bidder. only idiots and the bewildered participate. not that there is any shortage of those.
I don't care much about the german law either, but forcing people to use his real name in the internet is just wrong. With your real name you can have people know everything about you, while you don't even know that exists. May pull other data from other sources, like your taxes, where you live, who is your family. Is unhealty and a big risk, probably the motives has ben made a law in germany (making it a law is a bit excesive, I think). Revealing your real name open the floodgates for anyone to easy reveal all other data, and start connecting the dots.
-Woof woof woof!
That's not the reason. The advertising reason is false, the market can adjust for fake accounts etc as long as the number if real users does exist. The reason they oppose the law is that the facebook business model hinges on the dact that it is easy to find acquaintances and be in touch with people without having to remember their nicknames. It's why Facebook beat myspace, Friendster, Orkut, sixdegrees.com etc. the real name policy is what made Facebook a success.
As always, this is another example of how US companies sometimes fail to see that there are countries on this planet where data and privacy protection regulations do exist, and not just left to the companies to go by their own terms&conditions changing by the weather.
Facebook can fight this all they want, it still won't make them any more likeable to a lot of us.
I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
The reason is that they are evil and use it for harm to an individual and the US uses it!
I'm a man of wealth and taste
I've been around for a long, long year
Stole many a man's soul and faith
And I was 'round when Jesus Christ
Had his moment of doubt and pain
Made damn sure that Pilate
Washed his hands and sealed his fate
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name
But what's puzzling you
Is the nature of my game
I stuck around St. Petersburg
When I saw it was a time for a change
Killed the czar and his ministers
Anastasia screamed in vain
I rode a tank
Held a general's rank
When the blitzkrieg raged
And the bodies stank
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name, oh yeah
Ah, what's puzzling you
Is the nature of my game, oh yeah
I watched with glee
While your kings and queens
Fought for ten decades
For the gods they made
I shouted out,
"Who killed the Kennedys?"
When after all
It was you and me
Let me please introduce myself
I'm a man of wealth and taste
And I laid traps for troubadours
Who get killed before they reached Bombay
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guessed my name, oh yeah
But what's puzzling you
Is the nature of my game, oh yeah, get down, baby
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guessed my name, oh yeah
But what's confusing you
Is just the nature of my game
Just as every cop is a criminal
And all the sinners saints
As heads is tails
Just call me Lucifer
Cause I'm in need of some restraint
So if you meet me
Have some courtesy
Have some sympathy, and some taste
Use all your well-learned politesse
Or I'll lay your soul to waste, um yeah
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guessed my name, um yeah
But what's puzzling you
Is the nature of my game
Oh yeah, get on down
Tell me baby, what's my name
Tell me honey, can ya guess my name
Tell me baby, what's my name
I tell you one time, you're to blame
Oh, yeah
What's me name
Tell me, baby, what's my name
Tell me, sweetie, what's my name
I used to know someone. A blogger. Political - his alignment doesn't matter. Liberal, conservative, works either way. He was a total fanatic though: Loyal to his chosen faction, and convicted that it was his patriotic duty to fight against those who threatened America with their disagreement.
He got into a feud one day with another blogger, operator of some blog I know little of beyond that it related to native american affairs. As part of this feud, he purchased a new domain name, taking the same name as the native american blog. There he started a series if posts, all under his 'un-american' enemies name, advocating for the legalisation of child porn and the abolition of age of consent laws. When I left the two were engaged in a blog comment shouting match, with Mr Asshole claiming that he now owned the rights to that name as he paid money for the domain and demanding the native american blog be closed down.
This person is not your common, garden-variety asshole. This person is the internet equivilent of the psychopathic axe-murderer. There are many like him - sometimes their trigger is politics, sometimes religion, or something as trivial as loyalty to a football team or a particular celebrity.
And facebook wants these nutters to have access to your real name. So when you post something that offends their sacred cause, they'll be the ones posting child porn in your name, writing to your boss with an anonymous tipoff about your prior convictions for possession of heroin and mailing your neighbours to inform them that a sex offender lives among them.
Why is this even a story? Is there anywhere that Facebook actually enforces this policy?
I've seen no evidence that facebook remotely cares about this. Several groups I belong to have people using business pages as personal accounts (Yes I'm sure your name is Division Marketing, nice to meet you) and trolls using clearly fake names (Rusty Mcfuckertrollson) and despite having been reported for months or nearly a year at this point, all the accounts are still permitted to spam these groups or harass members as the admin is absentee.
In fact I've rarely, if ever, seen facebook enforce a single policy. /b/ used to have threads devoted to listing your troll accounts so that they could friend each other to appear more legit. A long time ago you used to be able to report with an explanation. Even explaining that, and pointing out 100 grouped accounts were all fake? a month later when someone started the thread again, all the same accounts showed up.
People who need gifts and things in games and whose friends have all blocked them started making fake accounts to play those games. I knew someone who had like 25 on their friends list, all with clearly fake names, all friended each other, and all with some cartoon picture as the profile picture.
As far as I know they're all still there despite having been reported like 2 years ago.
If people in germany want to use fake names, just do it, facebook clearly doesn't care.
One import detail is missing in TFA and on /.
They are currently trying to fine them 20.000€ for the violation of their order which is of course laughable. It might become more intersting if this goes to court because then the fines could increase rapidly.
That said, I am regarding the current move by ULD more as a kickstart for something bigger, because if
a) Facebook abides, which is highly unlikely, everybody wins
b) Facebook denies and pays 20k, then they are admitting to violate the law
c) Facebook denies and does not pay, it will go to court possibly to upper instances leading to a general ruling.
Mind you, the data protection officials in this small state in Germany's north have a history of pissing corporations to prove our rights, so I am very interested to see where this one goes ;-).
Here's a source for the 20k fine. You may run it through a translator service of your choice.
> http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Klarnamenzwang-Datenschuetzer-droht-Facebook-mit-Zwangsgeld-1770733.html
In other news: every one of the shitBook is an idiot. I mean... when I want to talk to a friend, I invite him/her to go out for a drink/food. It can be that easy. I remember times when cell phones were extremly expensive - I still had more freinds then now.
Oh please, come on....
There's no need for lame jokes with stupid made up names!
At least not as long as people like Karl Theodor Maria Nikolaus Johann Jacob Philipp Franz Joseph Sylvester Freiherr von und zu Guttenberg are quite real....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl-Theodor_zu_Guttenberg
bickerdyke
A tax-avoiding multinational from the USA (Facebook makes all kind of tricks to partially avoid and/or pay low taxes in Europe) lecturing the German regulators about the German tax payer's money ! What a hypocrisy ...
Specifically, last August, they required that the identities of file sharers must be turned over to rights holders.
So, for example, if someone posted a link to a file sharing site outside of German jurisdiction on their Facebook page, Facebook would be responsible for turning over the identity information for the nickname. At which point they would have a hell of a time complying with the court order to turn over the information they didn't have on file.
So, short of German tort reform, this severs their legal liability to shutting down the account in compliance with their Acceptable Use Policy, with the ability to reasonably claim ignorance that the person who registered the account did not do so in good faith compliance with said policy. The policy allows them to limit their legal liability.
Here's the Slashdot story on the German Federal Court of Justice ruling, which kind of trumps a decision by a privacy regulatory body with no actual legal teeth to contravene German Federal Court rulings, case law, or the German Federal law on which the ruling was based:
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/08/15/0043256/german-court-isps-must-hand-over-file-sharer-info
The bottom line is that the privacy regulator is likely to lose in a court battle because of existing laws and rulings which contradict them.
Typical Americam legal bluster.
Sadly it doesn't carry that much weight in the EU, especially in places like Germany. Facebook isn't likely to find a legal district with a compliant judge there. Its about time that American corporations operating in the real world find out that their activities can't be defined and regulated by the lax legal niceties observed in the hick town they chose to be incorporated in.
'effin shysters.
I am pretty sure that Facebook could enforce an unambiguous identification when users are registering. Every email provider is doing this. What this court decision says is that users can not be forced to make their identity public to everyone else on facebook.
I really don't get what the fuss is about. If you know machine learning you should know that the real name is the least important information.
I just have a pseudo fb account so I can check out a sport venue I work from time to time and I had my girlfriend as a fb friend. The intersection of those two social graphs alone led the fb algorithms to propose people and ads that I would call a very good match. If you have some statistically significant information about the habits, likes and dislikes of this intersection, then you have "me".
This is not inherently bad, You say "So what they are going to do with this?". Best example they exploit your needs in the worst way possible, because they know what you really want and they will make you pay for it. You say "Naa, nobody would be that stupid and no company would be that evil!"
Tobacco anyone (nicotine is as addictive as heroine) ? It will be like this, just that you can't quit being you.
You mean Facebook enforces its real name policy? WHEN DID THIS HAPPEN?!?!
The original Howling Frog is a fictional character and has no UID.
We believe the orders are without merit,
Uh, sorry, but it's a law. How much more backing does it need to have merit in the eyes of FB?
Fact is, half the people in my friend list (yes, I am on FB, though I don't use it much, but lots of people don't read e-mail anymore these days, only their FB messages) already are using pseudonyms. Either fake names or pseudo-names, i.e. nicknames that follow the firstname-lastname system, but that's it.
I understand the idea. I do have an online game and ask people for their real names as well. However, I also respect their anonymity, if they want it. They can hide the name from everyone else, and in-game they will use their character names.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
I don't like, either, Facebook's policy
That's why I don't have any Facebook account.
It's so simple.
Worse, I've had the UK's version of freedom of speech called "Immoral". Yet when asked to specify why the limits of free speech should be drawn where they want the line drawn and not where it's drawn in the UK, all I get is "[USA legal definition] is free speech and [Different legal definition] is not".
"But how are you going to connect with someone you haven't talked to in 20 years if they don't use their name?"
If all you know is their "real name", what if they got married?
How you do it is like this (a free clue for you clueless moron):
What school (and years) did they go to?
What job did they have leaving?
University?
Other Friends?
Fortunately, this kind of rhetoric doesn't work in Europe. Still, though, in essence they're saying; it's a waste of money for taxpayers and we'll help waste some more.
Nice company, but then again, we already knew that, didn't we?
A kraut by any other name, eh?
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
This has everything to do with marketing and the value of information and jack to do with anything else. Accounts under pseudonyms simply aren't as valuable to marketers as people real names.
Marketers know people make fake accounts and don't want to have their ad dollars put into accounts for a 23 year old female who is actually a 37 year old man. By insisting on real names Facebook justifies increased ad rates about the value of their data. That is why Facebook will take a 'policy' change to court.
And your life might be also in danger. For example, it is not unheard in many countries that Muslim family have killed their son/daughter if they have found out that he/she is not heterosexual or is having sex before marriage.
And there are many other issues that might more or less destroy you life/family even in western countries, if your name is connected to some things that you might want to discuss with a pseudonym. For example, some diseases, mental health problems, being victim of (sexual) abuse as a child etc might be problematics for many people.
It is boring and stale. Novelty is long gone, and kids think of it as something their parents use.
This statement :
"We believe the orders are without merit, a waste of German taxpayers' money and we will fight it vigorously".
is wrong on so many levels ..
1 The assumption that basic law is something you can 'fight' .. It is simply a rule with which you have to comply, not some arbitrary agreement. How insane this assumtion that you can 'bent law' is more clear when the subject is something else like:
"We will fight vigorously to be able to continue to kill all firstborns"
2 The 'belief' that 'the orders are without merit' is ridicules. If the law explicitly states that nicknames should be possible, and you explicitly disallow it, then you're cleary not compliant. What part of that is 'without merit' ? Note btw the fact that they only claim that it's without merit, without offering a single argument on WHY it whould be without merit. They don't think the ruling is without merit, they simply don't like this law.
3 'a waste of taxpayers money'. This is this tipical american obsession about what the goverment does with taxpayers money. Unfortunatly for Facebook people in Europe and especially German are not so distrusting about their goverment, and broadly agree that the goverment has a number of importent jobs to do. Keeping the excesses of capitalism at bay and especially protecting citizen against abuse by big corporations is generally considered a core task of the goverment in any sane democratie. So not only are people in Europe not so obsesed about what the state broadly does with taxmoney, but they also think that this is EXACTLY what the state should do. Thanks Facebook, for emphasising why we need a strong goverment.
What they are actually are saying is :
Fuck you, we will try to do anything we can to identify our users because we believe our bussiness depend on it. We will try to weasel our way out of any ruling
that says we're breaking the law, and try to spin / lobby to obfusicate the obvious.
Facebook: A worthy successor to MS
'We believe the orders are without merit, a waste of German taxpayers' money and we will fight it vigorously,' a Facebook spokeswoman said in an emailed statement.
I don't see how the order wastes German taxpayer's money. I do, however, see Facebook saying that they intend to waste it fighting it out in court. Coming from a company that most likely does not pay taxes in Germany (or much anywhere else for that matter).
They cut off the rest of the Facebook spokesman's quote actually. The rest is: "Yeah, I know it literally says it clear as day, word for word that we're violating the law but come on, we're fucking Facebook! And how the hell are we supposed to make money off of 'Gueten Von Struedel' the dog and his fake account?"
So, what about Google+? Will the German government make them change their policy also?
Let's hope.
Enjoying your day?
If this is upheld, Facebook may drop free accounts and switch to a $0.01-Euro-per-year account, with a limit of one account per person and require that the person whose name AND ADDRESS is on the payment accept full responsibility for the account.
No account will be granted without a name and address.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
We believe the orders are without merit
Well, of course they're without merit -- for Facebook.
For the people who are protected by the law, the orders have significant merit.
This quote is exactly equivalent to Facebook saying that they care only about their own profits, and have no intention of protecting their users.
In other words -- this quote provides no new information.
Wenn ist das Nunstück git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput!
We think the US shouldn't enforce it's laws on companies operating outside the US (see pirate sites) but believe that the Germans have a right to dictate the policies of a US company.
Good on Facebook. It sets a horrible precedent. If Germans don't want to use their real names on Facebook, they are free to not use Facebook.
Work Safe Porn
And that's what these social networks were all about, eh?
I'm all over the web. Google and the CIA know all.
I'm not about to post my real name so I can connect with anyone IRL. YMMV.
"a waste of German taxpayers' money" ...so let's start an appeal that will force the government to defend the ruling, hence wasting more taxpayer's money? Makes total sense...
--
Luck is just skill you didn't know you had.
Simple. Germany should block all Facebook domains if they will not follow these reasonable and legal privacy laws.
I will admit that I do not use my real name on my facebook account either. OTOH, since facebook doesn't have any true data about me, I'm not really worried should they release everything. Same for twitter and all the other large social networks.
Centralization sucks people. We need social networks that work similar to email - a federation of services tied together only using open protocols. You know ... sorta like email or xmpp.
Anyone else remember when Microsoft tried to take over email protocols and failed? Aren't we happy that attempt did not work?
1. We believe the orders are without merit,
2. a waste of German taxpayers' money and
3. we will fight it vigorously,
1. Don't think too much. If the lay says lump, you jump. Either that, or you go to an other country with different laws. (Or do "I AM THE LAW")
2. HOW can it be that fb wastes taxpayers money, unless they will do that by doing 3.
3. Stop wasting my money!
Privacy is terrorism.
Hmm.
For 20 years the standard advice especially for Minors (Think of the Kiddies!!) was to "never give out identifiable info online". So when did that suddenly change when they turn 19 and join Facebook?
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
A few questions:
Is that an overall fine, or per-incident.
Also, if FB pays the fine, but continues with "business as usual", then I could see a fairly quick escalation.
Fines should generally be
"you didn't stop doing X on time, so now you pay a penalty and need to stop NOW"
Not
"you didn't stop X, so here's a fine. Now keep on going"
Unfortunately it seems that in many cases it really amounts to the latter.
why do you think, children do not start having fb accounts as soon as they can use a computer and read/type enought to be able to use a site like facebook?
Even the U.S. president Obama told kids not to post stuff on Facebook.
http://wonkette.com/410951/obama-tells-kids-that-facebook-is-terrible
Here in the US, the difference between a debit card and a credit card is that a debit card can only be used to spend money which is actually sitting in the attached bank account, and that money is immediately deducted from that bank account. You are not being loaned any money on credit, you are just spending money you already have. So if you have $2,000 in your account, you can spend up to $2,000 with your debit card, which will be deducted immediately, and then it will decline further transactions.
A credit card, on the other hand, is a kind of revolving loan. You can owe the issuing bank up to your credit limit at any one time and pay it back whenever you like -- though of course you will be charged interest for delaying payment beyond the monthly bill due date, and there is a (usually trivial) minimum amount you must pay toward your balance each month. So if you have $2,000 in your account, and a $20,000 credit line, you can spend up to $20,000 on the card before it declines transactions... and then, unless you have some windfall coming in before the next bill's due date, you will only be able to pay off at most $2,000 of it (since that's all the money you have sitting around), and will have to carry an $18,000 balance, which will accumulate interest.
Often times the two types of cards are issued by the same banks and accepted by the same locations (modern debit cards with e.g. Visa or MasterCard logos are accepted anywhere that takes a Visa or MasterCard credit card), and you can use a credit card much like a debit card, never spending more than you have in the bank and paying off the balance in full each month and thus accruing no interest. But the credit card gives you much more power and flexibility... and consequently a lot more rope to hang yourself with if you're not responsible with money.
-Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
FB never had any respect for anyone just that they met their match when the IPO was launched.
in th beautiful age of Ad blocking, who really sees them? I use hosts file blocking on every device I own.. even on Android.
like two or three years ago but that fight was already lost back then, it's a waste of ad-revenue to battle it, turn your talented noses somewhere else because this ain't happening, not for facebook, not for google, not for anyone. It does however surprise me it's zee germans coming up first. Merkels shining light must have ignited something there.
maybe they're just one of the few european countries not too busy keeping head above water to deal with stuff like this, whatever it is, consider it final , it's a win for personal rights, nicknames are as old as the network itself afaik, who the hell but marketing scum could think they could change that ?
fire a bit more in the marketing department, that's where the money goes to waste probably
Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
If I wanted to I could legally change my name to trigpoint and have it on my passport, driving license and credit card. Most legal name changes follow the firstname last name principle, but they don't have to. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deed_poll