Facebook Can Keep Real Name Policy, German Court Rules

An anonymous reader writes "Facebook can stick with its real name policy in Germany, and doesn't have to allow nicknames on its platform for now. The regulator that ordered Facebook to change its policy based its orders on inapplicable German law, a German court ruled."

Comments

But there are so many fake accounts.

[bejiitas_wrath]

There are so many fake accounts on Facebook, how will the real name policy be enforced? You can name yourself anything you want and get away with it. That is what I have noticed anyway.

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[Anonymous Coward]

If I name myself Anonymous Coward, am I then everyone? No one? Anonymous? All of the above?

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[Anonymous Coward]

The reason Facebook wants your real name is because they want to market things to you and it makes it easier.

If you give them a fake name, then they have to go through the trouble of finding your real name from anyone you communicate with. Use facebook on a cell phone? Do your friends? Then facebook already knows your real name.

To them, you are confirmed as a real user by being cross referenced by your friend's contact books. Keep your silly alias.

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[Skapare]

We just know you as that multiple personality androgynous masked commentator that keeps Slashdot so busy.

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[doctor woot]

How easy it is to enforce the policy is irrelevant. The question is whether the policy should be allowed to exist at all, from a legal standpoint.

Personally I don't see why it shouldn't, if you're going to make use of a service, the person offering it should be allowed to know who it is they're offering the service to. So long as it's made clear what's being done with the information at hand there doesn't seem to be any legitimate reason to disallow it.

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[BitterOak]

Personally I don't see why it shouldn't, if you're going to make use of a service, the person offering it should be allowed to know who it is they're offering the service to. So long as it's made clear what's being done with the information at hand there doesn't seem to be any legitimate reason to disallow it.

I agree. Especially when it's a completely FREE service! No one is forcing anyone to be on Facebook. I'm not on Facebook and I don't wish I was.

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[Skapare]

Yeah, I can see it makes things easier if they want to market to me OFFLINE, to know my OFFLINE identity and location. But they offer NO VALUE to me to use an ONLINE service unless I am using my ONLINE identity. There are plenty of others that do, and they are not so full of spammers and other idios, so I see no benefit to me to bother with Facebook unless they allow my REAL identity.

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[eksith]

AC is usually the same personality... just sometimes extra grumpy.

That said, I don't see how this is different than what Google has on their hands. Even FB shuts down fake accounts (which I don't really see happening with any regularity) those seeking anonymity are only slightly inconvenienced. Besides, FB doesn't need your approval to get you to like things anyway. They've even been doing it to dead people.

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[davester666]

Ah, you speak of 'timothy'

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[Anonymous Coward]

> There are so many fake accounts on Facebook

Just as an FYI, Facebook tries to identify these and link them to your real account/identity.

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[antdude]

I used a fake name and got caught after about three weeks. :(

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[macbeth66]

Heh. No kidding. I have six accounts, all with real names. None of them mine.

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[Anonymous Coward]

this is exactly why i *don't* care about this rule at all - you're always free to break it because facebook has no way of knowing what your real name actually is.

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[Zontar The Mindless]

... facebook has no way of knowing what your real name actually is.

Just because you tell yourself this, does not make it true.

("The password is... cross-referencing!")

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[Anonymous Coward]

This completely misses the point. The point goes thus:

Facebook has a real name policy. German privacy watchdog forbade them to enforce such (which, IMO, is a good thing and far too few privacy watchdogs have the balls or the means to go there). German court says the privacy watchdog can't say that because facebook yurp is registered in Ireland, and Germany has no jurisdiction there.

Thus we see the insidious results of the rather new eu policy saying that the country of registration's privacy rules govern a company's privacy compliance for all of yurp. IE you can rulify all you want in your own country but all a company has to do is move hq to sidestep all privacy trouble. This is even easier than sidestepping tax rules. The only remedy is to ditch facebook, because for privacy rules, they're simply not bound by national law anywhere in Europe except Ireland.

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[AlanS2002]

Got two fake accounts, then my own plus access to another three accounts that belong to others. Not been busted.

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[History's Coming To]

Exactly - I despise facebook and all they stand for, but the idea that national law can intervene on whether or not a website can allow/deny pseudonyms is even more distasteful. It's their website, they can lay down their own naming policy.

The thing I object to is the creation of shadow accounts where they gather data on people who want nothing to do with facebook simply by extrapolating from the data of friends who are on the network. I'm not on facebook because I don't want to be on facebook, they should only be allowed to collect data on me that I have given them freely, not data third parties have given them about me.

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[Bing Tsher E]

But did you use a real sounding made up name, or an obvious false name? It makes a big difference. Heavily salting FB with a massive number of plausible soundings fake people is how we can take the zucking leviathan down.

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[AmiMoJo]

You have to be smart. On G+ I used my first named transliterated into Japanese. Real enough but unsearchable forpotential employers.

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[aamcf]

Where I live, there is no such thing as a 'real name'.

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[Anonymous Coward]

The reason Facebook wants your real name is because they want to market things to you and it makes it easier.

Or it could be a front for a govt operation to create a massive database of all people's activities and create profiles for god knows what purpose.

Re:But there are so many fake accounts.

[Zontar The Mindless]

Wonderful. Can you guarantee that I'll receive packages addressed to "Zon Mindless" rather than "Zontar T. Mindless" because many if not most Swedes apparently cannot handle the concept of short forms of long first names?

Now... what's a real name, again?

(See? I can go for easy points, too.)

A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[CajunArson]

Controversial title but here's why: With the ability to use nicknames, you can delude yourself into thinking you have privacy when you really don't. With a real-name policy you are having your lack of privacy rubbed right in your face so you don't forget it and do something stupid under an "assumption" of privacy.

You want real online privacy? Don't use Facebook.

You think this violates the "anonymity" of the Internet? The Internet was never anonymous.. it's just that the Internet made it (and still makes it) difficult to verify that the other person at the end of the pipe is actually who he says he is and isn't lying to you. Don't confuse lack of authentication with privacy, they ain't the same thing.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

According to facebook I live in the Andromeda Galaxy and commute to work to work via hyper-slipspace shower curtain technology to work as a systems analyst for Aperture Science Laboratories.

Oh, and my chat history will reveal that I'm planning to build a giant deathray.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is the reliability of the information. You can't be sure of who is at the other end. Computer forensics can't even prove it after the fact. We rely on assumptions and violence (physical restraint, threats, intimidation etc) to pressure people into pleading guilty and/or untruths at trial about the reliability of the evidence presented. Short of other more solid evidence you are anonymous. If you need to ensure anonymity there are ways of doing this too through Tor and other other networks.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

I have privacy. If I used Facebook, they wouldn't know my real name, ip, or even what browser I really use. Well, I'm not an idiot, so I don't use Facebook, but still.

The Internet was never anonymous

It's anonymous enough that you can make it nearly impossible for anyone to identify you.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Skapare]

I want to use the name I use online so people WILL know who I am. This is not anonymity ... people have figured out my "human world" identity. The name "Skapare" is my SOCIAL identity. Facebook is a SOCIAL site. So they should WANT me to use my social identity.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah Ha! So you admit you don't yet have a giant deathray! Now's the time to attack! Unless you have a big deathray, I guess.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

I am autistic. I have a job, and some people at my workplace very quickly identified that I was autistic. But some apparently haven't.

Online, I can anonymously post about issues in my life, things that I've done that I now understand would cause problems or confusion for other people, et cetera. With sites having "real name" policies, that is immediately lost. If I had to use my real name, there are so many things I could not disclose, because of the certainty of discrimination. If people knew some of the things which I've done they might think that I was a risk to myself, and with the last mass shooter supposedly being autistic, if people knew that I was autistic they might think that I was a risk to others. I am not; I am actually about the least violent person I've ever met.

I don't use Facebook, but there is no way that real name policies are helpful. They are very harmful. I am not the only person who has such reasons to want to maintain anonymity. And even though I know that certain information can immediately be looked up(things like IP addresses or relative locations), the internet does grant some anonymity. It's not that I am a criminal; I haven't done anything wrong. It's that I am someone who has been victimized, and I don't want to be further victimized. Insisting that if I wish to maintain anonymity I should avoid social sites is similar to the way I was ostracized when I attempted socialization when I was younger.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Kenja]

And yet I'm going to assume that CajunArson is not your real name. You frankly dont seem to understand what the word "privacy" means since none of the items you list equate to being "good for privacy".

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[pla]

Don't confuse lack of authentication with privacy, they ain't the same thing.

The vast majority of people don't give a flying fuck about whether or not someone can "theoretically" ID them. I harbor no delusions that, with Slashdot's and my ISP's cooperation, a suitably-empowered government agency could easily ID me. I've certainly said enough about myself on here to confirm even a "close enough" guess.

Most people just care that when their future employer googles their name, their postings on MyLittleFilly.xxx don't go to the top of the list.


You want real online privacy? Don't use Facebook.

All of the above aside - This!

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[BitterOak]

I have privacy. If I used Facebook, they wouldn't know my real name, ip, or even what browser I really use. Well, I'm not an idiot, so I don't use Facebook, but still.

Wrong! You THINK they wouldn't know your real name, ip, etc. I think that was the main point OP was trying to make.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Roogna]

As the grandparent post said, the real name policy is not the issue here though. Facebook is simply not the place for anonymous or private chatter. It's a site that should at all times, real name policy or not, be treated as a massive public forum. Not using Facebook is absolutely a solution, and even if you DO you use Facebook, you should stay aware that everything on it may as well be public information.

So in that sense it's not the place to post about issues in your life.
There's other, anonymous and/or private places for that.

Google+, Twitter, and Facebook, real names or not, are not the best places for anonymous or private discussion. As long as people keep that in mind and remember it, then the whole world is a safer place.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[martin-boundary]

Let's give a 5 year old a really sharp knife. With a really sharp knife, the kid can't delude himself, thinking it's a toy when it's not. With a really sharp knife in his hands, the danger is rubbed in his face so he doesn't forget it, ever, after he stupidly puts the blade in his mouth on an assumption that it's a popsicle. Not.

The flaw in your argument is this: There will always be a whole bunch of inexperienced people on the internet, and they shouldn't be penalized permanently just to teach them a lesson (you think 10 years from now, everybody will know about privacy? What about the kids who are born today, and will be surfing the net 10 years from now? They sure won't know).

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[seebs]

I am inclined to think that facebook is not the right tool for communicating about things you don't want people to associate with you.

That said, I also note that I overall get much better results being "out" about being autistic than I did when people didn't know. (Of course, I didn't know either for most of that time.)

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Skapare]

This is clearly the case for Google+ and Facebook. Twitter seems to allow online-only "avatar" registrations as long as you have an email address (and I have billions and billions of those). I have more than one twitter account.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Skapare]

Maybe you are on, or could join, WrongPlanet.net.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

Pseudonym-based systems are not going away anytime soon. Much of the growth of Twitter and Tumblr is driven by topics that people wouldn't want to talk about on their Facebook. (Actually, many people complain their Facebook is useless because they're linked to too many arms-length acquaintances. Its become just another email inbox.)

Real Name-based systems ARE better for civility and enforcing social norms. Anyone who remembers the pre-September Usenet can tell you that.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Skapare]

My 6 year old niece has been surfing the net, and knows how to do things like set up Admin privileges for users in Windows ... and that was over a year ago. To kids born recently, they know of no life without computers or the internet. It isn't just an essential to them ... it's the way life is. I've warned my brother that if she encounters the content filter, she would probably just remove it, and may have already.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[CajunArson]

Blah Blah Blah.

I'm well aware that the Government or hackers* could compromise Slashdot and find out who I am. I also don't care. I can also lie to you about who I am on Slashdot. Assuming you use the handle "Kenja" on any other online forums I can probably show you fun-filled research papers from people who are really good at data mining who could probably track you down with a very high probability just based on the content of your publicly-available posts and some educated cross-reference guessing. It's life, deal with it.

*Slashdot still runs on Apache 1.3 you know, and the "infrastructure" if you can call it that hasn't been updated since the late '90s. It's been compromised in the past and I feel that hackers don't bother with doing more damage because there isn't any money in it.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

This man's name is indeed "Skapare", but it's pronounced "Throat Warbler Mangrove".

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Roogna]

Yeah, in that sense twitter can certainly be used semi-anonymously. But one should remember that it is still effectively a gigantic public forum (As is /.), and no matter the name you're using, if you talk about things directly related to your life (Such as employment) you may identifiable.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Zontar The Mindless]

With the ability to use nicknames, you can delude yourself into thinking you have privacy when you really don't. With a real-name policy you are having your lack of privacy rubbed right in your face so you don't forget it and do something stupid under an "assumption" of privacy.

...

... The Internet was never anonymous.. it's just that the Internet made it (and still makes it) difficult to verify that the other person at the end of the pipe is actually who he says he is and isn't lying to you. Don't confuse lack of authentication with privacy, they ain't the same thing.

Would mod you up but I've already posted in this thread.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Zontar The Mindless]

FYI, it's spelt "Zontar the Mindless" but pronounced "Raymond Luxury Yacht".

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Zontar The Mindless]

...facebook is not the right tool for communicating about things you don't want people to associate with you.

Bingo. It's that simple. seebs gets this, accepts the reality, and (or so we might reasonably assume) behaves accordingly.

(Unlike the 90% of users who seems to think FB should somehow be private whenever they just happen to want it to be.)

I've been in the public eye for 20+ years. When you live and work in the Bible Belt, you do not talk about your fondness for Scotch whiskey on your radio show. Unless you want the whole tri-county area to know about it. Which, if you want your ratings to remain viable, you don't. You might think just whispering it would keep it private, but hey, it's awfully amazing what a 100kW transmitter can do with even a whisper.

Similarly, when you're on the Internet, you don't post anything you would not wish to see associated with your name and photo on the cover of TIME magazine. Er, that dates me a bit, doesn't it? Let's say instead that, when you're on the Internet, you don't post anything to FB you would not wish to see associated with your name and likeness on the Jon Stewart show (he still has one, right?) or The Daily Kos.

On the Internet, "private" means--at best--"nobody else can see it... yet".

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[stephanruby]

Insisting that if I wish to maintain anonymity I should avoid social sites is similar to the way I was ostracized when I attempted socialization when I was younger.

Yes, the real name policy is idiotic, but you shouldn't "avoid social sites" because of it. You should just be careful about what you disclose on social sites (just like everybody else should too). There is no reason you can't have one login for social sites and a different login for other bulletin boards.

That's how real life works too. Everybody has multiple layers of identities. And everybody practices different levels of self-disclosure based on the different persons they're talking to.

Even the kids that ostracized you when you were younger, I'll bet that they didn't talk about the fact that their mom and dad were alcoholics, or that they were caught shoplifting the week before, or whatever else they might have been embarrassed about themselves. Knowing how much to disclose, and how much not to disclose, and to whom, is an important life skill to have.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Mashiki]

You think this violates the "anonymity" of the Internet? The Internet was never anonymous..

Really? Somehow I had this sneaking suspicion that pseudonyms allowed people to make the choice of anonymity or not. Oh wait, you're saying they're not the same thing. But you're wrong. The lack of an actual identity and authentication is the core of being anonymous.

Never mind that people value nicknames more than they value their real names on forums, people have a higher intrinsic value for a unique username.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[donscarletti]

I've met some extremely high functioning autistics before. I've also met autistics who do not have violent outbursts.

It is rare however to see a high functioning autistic to write a well structured and empathetic passage like that without editing it for several hours. Given you wrote that passage in under an hour, clearly you were misdiagnosed.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Bing Tsher E]

Yeah, but claiming to be autistic is a big deal for a lot of people. It gives them a feeling of entitlement. Everyone wants to belong. It's much more self-validating than simply being shy.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Rakhar]

You say he should just be careful what he discloses... You are failing to see the problem. Until he's had a lot of experience with a new social situation, he doesn't know what is acceptable and what isn't. And even then, that doesn't mean he understands WHY. Combined with the fact that he can't fully erase any actions or statements he makes online after making them, that leaves avoiding that media altogether or remaining anonymous. You are telling him to do the thing he has problems doing to begin with.

Also, hindsight is 20/20, etc.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Rakhar]

Because he obviously has never thought about this issue before now, right? It didn't affect or influence him in any way prior to this story being posted.

When you have a mental condition and people tell you they just don't believe that you have it, it makes you question your own sanity. Your post makes a rather large assumption about someone you have never met and could be detrimental to the person it's aimed at. Apparently he's not the only one that has problems with emathy and filtering his output...

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[cheekyjohnson]

I find it rather unlikely that Facebook could find out your real name if you didn't give it to them and also didn't provide any ways for them to find it. They have virtually no chance of finding out your real ip address unless you seriously give it to them.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[Hognoxious]

I have a job, and some people at my workplace very quickly identified that I was autistic. But some apparently haven't.

Those would be the aspies.

Re:A real-name policy is GOOD for privacy

[donscarletti]

Autism is a real condition with real people and families who need real help in dealing with it.

The way it's been trivialised into a mild personality quirk by self-diagnosed "autistics" and over-eager pediatritians is doing nothing but interfering with help getting where it is needed.

Being the most popular guy in the school is not normal, it's a profound gift. For most of us on this site, myself included, learning to make friends, fit in, use body language was one of the hardest parts of our lives. That does not make you autistic, that just means it's not your strongest skill. Calling youself autistic when you are capable of slowly learning these things is not helping yourself and is certainly not helping those who really have a serious disability that needs specialist help to overcome.

Define "real name"

[Skapare]

Who here knows what my "human legal name" is? Everyone online knows me by either my Norwegian nickname (Skaperen) or my Swedish nickname (Skapare). There's no point in getting on Facebook at all unless I use these names. Well, OK, I do have a couple other nicknames.

I don't think a law should force them to accept nicknames. This should happen when Mark quits being stupid.

Re:Define "real name"

[Anonymous Coward]

This should happen when Mark quits being stupid.

NeverGonnaHappen

Re:Define "real name"

[Grimbleton]

Who are you again?

Re:Define "real name"

[CodeBuster]

This should happen when Mark quits being stupid.

You may be in for a long wait.

Re:Define "real name"

[Anonymous Coward]

Who here knows what my "human legal name" is?

Your name is Phil Howard.

Re:Define "real name"

[houghi]

Who here knows what my "human legal name" is?

Here? Nobody. But now EVERYBODY knows that it isn't your real name.
On Facebook, it will be your mom, or some old friend from school who you befriended on Facebook, but who still holds a grudge and reports you.
I used to have an account, but there was NOTHING I liked about the daily drivel of the what people were doing. Finding old friends? There is a reason they are not my friends anymore. People part their ways for various reasons and the only things I got out of it was : "So what are you doing now? Wow. 3 kids and a dog? We must meet in real life."
In all cases I was the person who was looking for them and not even via Facebook. Just using Google. For then I was the person who they sometimes talk about and wonder "How would houghi be doing?" without actually being interested in it.

So using facebook was not very appealing and I canceled my account (with 200+ people on my list. I explained them how they would be able to contact me. None who did not already contact me before did so afterward.)

For me there is a simple reason I do not want to use my own name. Nothing I say, I can be held responsible for concerning past, present or future employers about anything I say/said in the past, present or future.

I do understand that that is not a free-card to say anything I desire. I am still responsible for my own words.

Another reason is that things WILL be taken out of context and I WILL change my mind and opinion about certain things and I do not want some old idea I used to have and that I think now is wrong haunt me for the rest of my life.
I also do not want to be afraid to express my opinion now, because I might change my mind in the future.

Re:Define "real name"

[Xarius]

Not sure about the rest of the world, but in the UK you can call yourself whatever you like quite legally--as long as you're not doing it with the intent to commit fraud or break the law.

So what is your real name when these are the circumstances?

Re:Define "real name"

[mrbester]

Your "real name" is whatever you decide to call yourself. You cab have more than one depending on the circumstances in which you use it.

What Facebook wants is your "official name", as in what your tax office / passport agency knows you as. This, however, is a legal fiction purely for officialdom and has nothing to do with any site that functions as a social environment without connection to records of citizenship. So they can sod off.

Re:Define "real name"

[Skapare]

See, someone found my free software.

Just another scheme

[no-body]

to snitch all your stuff there goes like this:

- please prove your legal identity within 8 days
- account closed, no more access nor ownership

It's the REAL world after all ...

[DavidClarkeHR]

There are so many people breaking the law on my street, how will the insert strange and/or unreasonable law be enforced? You can do anything you want if you are smart, and get away with it. That is what I have noticed anyway.

Fixed that for you. Just for the record, you have broken more laws than mitzvots. Doesn't make them any less ridiculous.

Re:It's the REAL world after all ...

[Zontar The Mindless]

Saying "mitzvots" is like saying "commandmentses".

The singular is "mitzvah", the plural is "mitzvot".

I knew that, and I'm not even Jewish.

Re:It's the REAL world after all ...

[I'm New Around Here]

"Mitzvah"??

Is that the bar my jewish friends go to every couple of months?

Re:It's the REAL world after all ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Saying "mitzvots" is like saying "commandmentses".

The singular is "mitzvah", the plural is "mitzvot".

I knew that, and I'm not even Jewish.

I CAN HAZ INTERWEBz?

Re:It's the REAL world after all ...

[Zontar The Mindless]

Vey is mir, you must be... *facepalm*

Re:It's the REAL world after all ...

[I'm New Around Here]

Vey is mir, you must be... *facepalm*

I "must be" making a joke you dunce. "Bar mitzvah", ever heard of it?

Re:It's the REAL world after all ...

[Zontar The Mindless]

"Bar mitzvah", ever heard of it?

Yeah, the house red there is Mogen David. The hostess is Rachel. I get all verklempt just thinking about her.

Totally incorrect

[Anonymous Coward]

The Internet was never anonymous.

That's completely incorrect. The Internet was *always* anonymous or pseudonomous (which is just anonymous with a semi-stable unauthenticated username), and it still is. What makes it anonymous is that you can participate in almost everything without revealing your real name to those with whom you interact.

The fact that people can track your real name down if they're sufficiently motivated and skilled doesn't alter that situation. And the fact that a few *choose* to reveal their real names doesn't alter it either.

And finally, Facebook's policy doesn't change anonymity on the Internet, Their policy merely forces more people to lie if they value their privacy.

laws and idiots

[Anonymous Coward]

So Germany doesnt try to apply laws on the internet. Thats the job of the merry old englanders of u.s. congress.

-the gErman chacell0r

I used an anime name same with my friends

[Anonymous Coward]

i don't see a reason to use a real name online except for filing for taxes or paying your bills, doing online banking or ordering off of amazon. Social networking is meant to be anonymous and that's how I will continue to use it whether legal or not. The day when I'm forced to use a real name will be the day i stop using social network sites.

Don't enter real information on commercial sites.

[hessian]

If you're buying something, be very careful but it's acceptable.

However, on freebie sites like Facebook it makes no sense to let them see into your life.

It's amazing how many people will rail against "corporations" and then put their entire life history, home address, pictures of friends and family, etc. into Facebook.

Re:But there are so many fake accents.

[Hognoxious]

how will the real name policy be enforced?

Wie dies, Tommy Schweinhund!

What does Facebook consider a "real" name?

[Anonymous Coward]

My wife's maden name is Foundation. Her brother can't get on Facebook because they don't believe it's his real name.
I met a girl with the last name of Dyke. Facebook said it was "inappropriate."
I have heard several stories like this.
My wife has several alternate accounts with no problem, but many people are being told their name isn't "real."

Re:What does Facebook consider a "real" name?

[maxwell demon]

I wonder how much trouble this man might have had with his real name ;-)

who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Facebook is so 2012. I'm using mutineer.org which is so much better.

Re:When I was in the joint...

[chilvence]

This was so hilarious and intelligent that I jizzed into my own eyeballs in delight

They don't care much unless someone complains

[xiando]

I've been using "Ã-yvind SjÃlvklart" ("SjÃlvklart" is Swedish for obviously) since someone registered on Facebook using my e-mail address sometime in the middle of last year and they haven't closed my account yet. And they didn't mind that I changed my name to that (the person who registered with my e-mail used another surname). It may be that you only get into trouble when someone reports you and a human at facebook actually looks your account. I personally do not mind if they close my account, though, they can let me use only my first real name or I won't mind not having an account there.