Slashdot Mirror
FCC Imposes ISP Privacy Rules and Takes Aim At Mandatory Arbitration (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: The Federal Communications Commission today imposed new privacy rules on Internet service providers, and the Commission said it has begun working on rules that could limit the use of mandatory arbitration clauses in the contracts customers sign with ISPs. The new privacy rules require ISPs to get opt-in consent from consumers before sharing Web browsing data and other private information with advertisers and other third parties. The rules apply both to home Internet service providers like Comcast and mobile data carriers like Verizon Wireless. The commission's Democratic majority ensured the rules' passage in a 3-2 vote, with Republicans dissenting. Democratic Commissioner Mignon Clyburn was disappointed that the rules passed today did not include any action on mandatory arbitration clauses that prevent consumers from suing ISPs. But Chairman Tom Wheeler said that issue will be addressed in a separate rule-making. In the case of privacy rules, the FCC passed the NPRM in March and the final rules today. Clyburn argued that the FCC could have imposed mandatory arbitration restrictions today, because the privacy NPRM sought public comment about whether to ban mandatory arbitration. Under the FCC rules, ISPs that want to share consumer data with third parties such as advertisers must obtain opt-in consent for the most sensitive information and give customers the ability to opt out of sharing less sensitive information. Here's how the FCC describes the new opt-in and opt-out requirements: "Opt-in: ISPs are required to obtain affirmative 'opt-in' consent from consumers to use and share sensitive information. The rules specify categories of information that are considered sensitive, which include precise geo-location, financial information, health information, children's information, Social Security numbers, Web browsing history, app usage history, and the content of communications.
Opt-out: ISPs would be allowed to use and share non-sensitive information unless a customer 'opts-out.' All other individually identifiable customer information -- for example, e-mail address or service tier information -- would be considered non-sensitive, and the use and sharing of that information would be subject to opt-out consent, consistent with consumer expectations. Exceptions to consent requirements: Customer consent is inferred for certain purposes specified in the statute, including the provision of broadband service or billing and collection. For the use of this information, no additional customer consent is required beyond the creation of the customer-ISP relationship." ISPs must clearly notify customers about the types of information they collect, specify how they use and share the information, and identify the types of entities they share the information with.
Fuckers. Small government my ass, they're just sellouts.
Democrats, Republicans are parties of bloody, racist U.S. imperialism. Greens, Libertarians, etc. are just loser wannabe capitalist parties. For a workers party to fight for socialist revolution!
UNITE with the Campaign for a Free Internet because today, our future begins with tomorrow!
I don't know what's gotten into this new FCC, but I love it. I can't think of a single organization that is currently doing more for the consumer than these guys. It's like a consumer friendly tiger, or baby-safe Harambe if you will.
I wonder how long it will take until the Comcast/Verizon/AT&T lobby shuts them down via congress.
If the Republicans keep espousing a business before citizen privacy position, I might have to stop voting Republican.
How many flaming hula-hoops do I have to jump through?
Where are you posting from? 1965?
If the Republicans keep espousing a business before citizen privacy position, I might have to stop voting Republican.
That's not an entirely fair assessment of Republicans
They espouse business before everything else [other than campaign contributions]
If only we could all strong-arm everyone else in to binding arbitration, we could get rid of the law once and for all.
Think of all the money that would be saved!
Thanks, I have recently been looking for information approximately this topic for a long time and yours is the best I have found out so far. But, what concerning the conclusion? Are you certain concerning the supply?http://www.snapchatfaceeffects.com/2016/10/snapchat-username.html
Removing ISP tracking shit is a start, but that's only a tip of an iceberg. What about all the other tracking shit around the web that nobody opts into? Shit, every page has got google-analytics and two dozen other random data-broker scripts.
Yes, yes, yes, it might be possible to block a lot of that, but most people have no idea it's even happening, leave alone how, and disabling scripting breaks a lot of sites.
The web is one giant cesspool of tracking shit.
The Republicans are for BIG corporate business. And when you realize this, they don't look like hypocrites regarding their stances on things.
If BIG business had a problem with anti-abortion, your can bet your ass that The Republicans would be pro-choice and fuck their base.
You have to go five levels deep in the menu to opt out.
In real countries, you have to separately sign and date any opt-in that gives away your privacy, and the default is No.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
You don't actually even care if you make sense any more, do you?
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Wait, so the Republicans dissenting against a very complex set of government regulation is now a strike against small government?
And let's be very clear. This isn't privacy legislation, this is protectionism by the incumbents to prevent competition.
Did I near a "whoosh" sound, or are you really serious?
If you are serious and you think that, in the past decade, the republicans have put citizen privacy before businesses, then I have a very nice bridge to sell you.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
The constitutional amendment we should be worried about is the one mandating gun ownership and exemption from prosecution if you shoot people for reasonable cause.
"any more" pays it too much credit
All I hear is the eerie silence from your whoosh canceling out his whoosh.
If you are serious and you think that, in the past decade, the republicans have put citizen privacy before businesses, then I have a very nice bridge to sell you.
Is that bridge open?
I'm also not a fan of unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats making rules that have the force of law.
No because a big business republican decided to close the lanes to the other side because he was butt hurt by another politician
ISP Privacy Rules ...
Only a few countries demand personal details be stored in the country being serviced: Most countries allow data to be shipped to a country (*cough*, USA, *cough*) with minimal data protection laws. So it doesn't stop spyware agencies like Microsoft or Yahoo, tracking agents like Facebook, or online retailers like Amazon, even in the USA. Privacy needs to be given to all subscribers by default. These rules need to be championed by the more powerful FTC, for that reason, plus the recent court case that claimed the FCC can't tell ISPs a fucking thing. I foresee another court case.
Here's the problem. Every piece of online activity at all stages are being tracked.
- Gmail/Hotmail/Yahoo Mail being tracked by the companies
- Email services easily accessible by the government - US AND CANADA
- Social media Facebook/twitter tracking on virtually every website out there.
- Even if you don't social media accounts, they are being embedded in all news websites giving them information to track you on.
- Click tracking by services like bit.ly, facebook and google
- Google tracking with their fonts hosted on their domains.
- Google apis that are used by so many webpages out there.
- Ad tracking
- Persistent cookies
- Tracking based on Canvas/screen resolution/ plugins information
- Browsers calling home (IE7-10 calls home to skype domain, Chrome (even Chromium) calls home whenever the browser starts, Firefox telemetry with Google Safebrowsing on by default).
- Operating sytems keylogging and calling home (Windows 10)
- Cell phone OS tracking (Android), and apps like Facebook that take your private photos on your phone's contact list and upload to their servers, to populate every piece of data it can get hold of.
You may do everything you can in your power to protect your privacy, but as soon as someone puts a picture of you on their phone contact list, install facebook there with your email address, then it's there in the databases. You're fucked.
You can say "well, install this plugin", "Use Palemoon Browser", "add rules in your router" - but it's impossible to keep up with.
Canada even now has a law that allows them to access your personal laptop and phone freely. They even have this propagandat-scare-tactic-pseudo-documentary-series that proudly shows their border agents accessing people's devices and forbidding them entry, always with the line "If you have nothing to hide", etc, etc.
Could be 1865. The party of Lincoln is as dead as he is.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
AT&T is really gonna let that happen....
it would make them instant criminals. Not that it stopped them in the past, but it would instantly put them on the hook.
This won't pass, AT&T won't stand for it. Too much revenue at stake!
-
Because this seems like a reasonable set of rules, so there's no way it'll be allowed to continue.
I mean, I was reading it, and I wasn't even feeling like TWC was driving a semi with ghost-pepper spikes straight up my ass.
So it can't possibly stand a chance.
How exactly is "You can't sell my information without my permission" NOT a privacy law protection ?
>this is protectionism by the incumbents to prevent competition.
Yeah, republicans say this about ALL regulations up to and including antitrust law. It may be true sometimes, but you've been crying this wolf so many times the ony thing sane people can do is assume it's NEVER true.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Fuckers. Small government my ass, they're just sellouts.
You know, I hate the whole either-you're-R-or-D thing and I hate being called one or the other, but whenever some obviously corrupt shit is happening, there's never any question as to which party is on the wrong side. Every. Time.
I'm all for an amendment requiring gun ownership. If you can't afford one you can be issued one.