Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Germany's Federal Cartel Office Claims Facebook 'Extorts' Personal Data From Users (independent.co.uk)

Posted by BeauHD on from the social-isolation dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Independent: Germany's Federal Cartel Office is examining whether Facebook essentially takes advantage of its popularity to bully users into agreeing to terms and conditions they might not understand. The details that users provide help generate the targeted ads that make the company so rich. In the eyes of the Cartel Office, Facebook is "extorting" information from its users, said Frederik Wiemer, a lawyer at Heuking Kuhn Lueer Wojtek in Hamburg. "Whoever doesn't agree to the data use, gets locked out of the social network community," he said. "The fear of social isolation is exploited to get access to the complete surfing activities of users." Andreas Mundt, the Cartel Office's president, said last week he's "eager to present first results" of the Facebook investigation this year. Like the EU's Google investigation, he said the Facebook case tackles "central questions ensuring competition in the digital world in the future".

83 comments

  1. Re:STREISAND REBUILDS HER FACE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm feeling a little verclempt.

  2. Re:STREISAND REBUILDS HER FACE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's funny because Jews have big noses.

  3. Let's see, judge versus judge... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    US Judge: It's totally fine if Facebook is tracking you tighter than we'd let the FBI track Nazis.

    German Judge: Stupid Nazi draconian Facebook terms and conditions are an Orwellian situation!

  4. I'm not understanding the problem? by tlambert · · Score: 0, Troll

    I'm not understanding the problem?

    Instead of being bullied, why don't those German users just use one of the incredibly popular German social media sites coming out of Germany's equivalent of Silicon Valley, and their thriving venture capital sector, and startup company friendly tax laws?

    Oh. Wait. Germany. Where Spotify is illegal because they aren't paying the BMG tax on songs not recorded either in Germany or by David Hasselhoff, but which you have to pay anyway.

    Never mind.

    1. Re:I'm not understanding the problem? by rogoshen1 · · Score: 2

      Please, the east germans were doing mass surveillance before lord admiral zuck was born. Things like FB are old hat to them; though Zuck and co has pretty much perfected it.

    2. Re:I'm not understanding the problem? by beelsebob · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or, alternatively... In Europe, we actually have pretty strong protections on our privacy, where companies aren't allowed to just grab all the data they can and run with it. Facebook tries to grab all our data and run with it, and unsurprisingly are being found to be outside the law.

    3. Re:I'm not understanding the problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I can see you don't understand, corporate serf.

    4. Re:I'm not understanding the problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Lives of Others is a great movie about that:

      http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405094/

      The Germans gleefully spied on each other. The Stasi at one point had over 90,000 employees in just East Germany, and over 2 million informants out of a population of about 16 million. That means that every one out of eight East Germans was spying for the government. Germany loves their mass surveillance.

    5. Re:I'm not understanding the problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So you're fine with corporations and governments (who have more regulations about personal info) spying on you without your consent? Or you'd prefer to read 50 pages of TOS every time you use a website?

      i see you have a username with Slashdot. You're fine with the parent company of Slashdot tracking your every move across the internet? They might already be, they just haven't told you.

    6. Re:I'm not understanding the problem? by allcoolnameswheretak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Don't paint the German government as the bad guy with your populist straw man argument. The German government claims that facebook is abusing it's market position to force people into terms of use that they wouldn't accept otherwise. This is no different than, say a cable or energy company, abusing a dominant market position to drive prices unreasonably high. Basically it's a monopoly situation and should be scrutinized and penalized as such.

      In contrast, before exercising some weak attempts at Euro-bashing you should consider that your American megacorps like facebook pay next to nothing in taxes in the US, because they prefer to be headquartered in Ireland. Something that the European Union is also fighting against.

      The "laissez faire" capitalism that is so popular in the US, especially among Republicans promotes small government and power to the corporations. It will not protect the rights of ordinary citizens. Be glad that at least in some parts of the world the government still serves the people.

    7. Re: I'm not understanding the problem? by dougdonovan · · Score: 1

      germany is a little slow when it comes to facebook. i guess.

    8. Re:I'm not understanding the problem? by tlambert · · Score: 1

      Basically it's a monopoly situation and should be scrutinized and penalized as such.

      So ...much like the German position on what constitutes beer putting German brewers in a monopoly position, yes?

      So the German brewers should be penalized as such, in order to make the German market safe for French beer, yes?

    9. Re:I'm not understanding the problem? by fazig · · Score: 1

      Yes, apparently you are not understanding the problem.
      You compare the entirety of an industry with hundreds of competing individuals with one large social media conglomerate that has a monopoly according to German definitions. If there was such a single and huge beer brewery in Germany, controlling most of the market share, the cartel agency would be after them as well.

    10. Re:I'm not understanding the problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you talking about the 'Reinheitsgebot'? It's not even a real law any more. For example I can buy imported Corona in almost every super market. And it is even labelled and sold as 'Bier'.

      Anyway, every market can make its own rules and laws. And if you want to do business in that market you have to adhere to those rules. For example you should be familiar with Volkswagen and diesel-gate. They violated the rules that the US imposes on cars that are sold there, they lied to the consumers and the authorities. In your opinion they should have gotten out of that situation scot-free, because they're a company that originally comes from a different country? I don't think so. They violated US laws and have to suffer the consequences if they want to continue doing business in that market.

    11. Re: I'm not understanding the problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm fine with a 500 page TOS, so long as there is a comprehensive exam, equivalent to passing he the bar on all topics involved, in order to use the service. Otherwise the consent is not informed and should be invalid

      ToS too complicated? Then simplify it. We won't use your data is simple and understandable. We will sell your information to dick pill makers and political campaigns in either side to harass you is simple too. The vague "may, partners, otherwise allowed by law" shit is weasel word bullshit.

    12. Re:I'm not understanding the problem? by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Germany loves their mass surveillance.

      I think you have lost the plot:

      Many Germans died in their extremely prolonged but eventually successful struggle to defeat mass surveillance, and somehow they resent the Americans imposing a considerably worse regime on them.

      (The dead are presumably revolving at such high speed in their graves that it is causing a disturbance of the psyche).

      I think you will find that quite a lot of the world's population feels much the same, and America's view of the world is not widely shared by others. Most of the world believes that government is a process whereby they collaborate to stop this kind of scummy exploitation by corporations, and not the other way round.

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    13. Re:I'm not understanding the problem? by dunkelfalke · · Score: 2

      The German market is already safe for French beer. Actually, even safer than for German beer because the German position on what constitutes beer is only valid for beers brewed in Germany for the German market. Import beers have been exempt from this regulation for decades.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    14. Re:I'm not understanding the problem? by bn-7bc · · Score: 1

      Well the question here id, does thr german rules on beer prevent non germsn beer ftom beeing sold, or is it fust difficult to sell it with the word beer on the conrIner/menue/ price list, I must admit this is ghe first I’v heard if it since I’m never in Germany and don’t drink beer.

    15. Re:I'm not understanding the problem? by volodymyrbiryuk · · Score: 1

      Since when is Spotify illegal in Germany?

      --
      sudo rm -r -f --no-preserve-root /
    16. Re:I'm not understanding the problem? by silentcoder · · Score: 2

      You do know that the country of East Germany hasn't existed in 28 years, right - and when the wall came down and they merged it was the freedom loving West Germans who took over, right ? Right ?

      If anything, the experience of a large number of their citizens who lived under the KGB and the STASI are a big part of why Germany is so obsessive about privacy rights these days - they've experienced the alternative.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    17. Re:I'm not understanding the problem? by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      I've heard language like yours before... where was it... where was it.. aah right, I remember.
      http://www.imdb.com/title/tt01...

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    18. Re:I'm not understanding the problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For some reason, "America" is used however someone with an opinion would like to use it. Sort of like, "The Children."

      "America's view of the world" -- honestly what do you know?

    19. Re:I'm not understanding the problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      haha like BP "suffered".

    20. Re: I'm not understanding the problem? by prefec2 · · Score: 1

      Other sites (competition) closed down, e.g., StudiVZ, or do not play an important role,e.g., MySpace. Therefore, FB has a monopoly and can force people to accept term which they would not accept when real alternatives would exist. In Germany monopolies are considered bad for obvious reasons. Therefore, they are investigated by the anti monopoly authority.

    21. Re:I'm not understanding the problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh. Wait. Germany. Where Spotify is illegal

      Lying Nazi

  5. The new German economic model by knorthern+knight · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    1) Pass wierd legislation authorizing huge fines for whatever
    2) Levy huge fines against American companies
    3) Profit!

    --

    I'm not repeating myself
    I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
    1. Re:The new German economic model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Monkey see, monkey do. The USA has been a prolific teacher.

    2. Re: The new German economic model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, those pesky weird privacy laws ruining the spyfest. I wish we had a police state too.

    3. Re: The new German economic model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are free to stay out of Germany if they don't want to obey German law. Ditto for any countries with applicable treaties.

      What's that, you want to have your cake and eat it too? Then F off.

    4. Re:The new German economic model by dunkelfalke · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here's an interesting difference between USA and Germany:
      When Google or Facebook break the law in Germany and are fined for it - and the fines aren't even that high, maybe a couple of days of the company's profit - Americans are outraged. When VW breaks the law in the USA and gets an enormous fine that amounts to the yearly profit of the company, Germans generally agree that VW had it coming.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    5. Re:The new German economic model by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Those poor American companies. All they were doing was engaging in unethical behaviour that the weak regulatory culture of the US permits, and now they're not being allowed to do the same thing in Germany, where companies that had to abide by modest standards of acceptable behaviour couldn't compete!

      Next thing you know, you'll be saying that Chinese companies can't set up factories in America and employ people for $2/day working 16-hour days and dump their waste products directly in the Mississippi! After all, that's all completely acceptable under the regulatory regime in their own country - it's the fault of American companies if they can't compete in manufacturing with their innovative Chinese competitors.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  6. Simple solution by Alain+Williams · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Just don't sign up; find real friends in the real world -- rather than a thousand people who you think are friends because they know what you had for breakfast.

  7. hyperbolic by supernova87a · · Score: 2

    Last I remember, Facebook and oh, wait, every other online activity is a voluntary participation. And I would hope that the German regulator realizes that the definition of extortion is: the demanding payment of money, property or services, while threatening to commit an illegal act if that is not fulfilled.

    I would hope that a regulator would be a bit more conservative about extending its domain where it doesn't have the right to.

    1. Re:hyperbolic by fluffernutter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Apparently you haven't missed a friend's WEDDING before because they only saw it fit to send invites on Facebook. It's happened to me. Now we can debate all day about how correct it was for them to do that, but event missed just the same. Facebook has become pervasive enough that people assume you are on it and forget to communicate in other ways.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    2. Re:hyperbolic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ex-tor-tion Law. the crime of obtaining money or some other thing of value by the abuse of one's office or authority. so basically, you're completely wrong.

    3. Re:hyperbolic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ... every other online activity is a voluntary participation ...

      Corresponding with businesses and government is voluntary? Government offices in my country now walk one through their online services, in the office if one is computer illiterate: They hand-over a paper and snail-mail alternative, only when a signature is required.

      It's not just online communication that is now "voluntary": I had a problem with my phone service, so I went to the local service branch. I told to phone a number, meaning I had to have a phone to complain that I didn't have a phone. The real kick in the teeth was, I wasn't allowed to use their service phone to call their service faults number.

    4. Re:hyperbolic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You're blaming Facebook for the fact that your "friend" didn't want you at his wedding?

    5. Re:hyperbolic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last I remember, Facebook and oh, wait, every other online activity is a voluntary participation. And I would hope that the German regulator realizes that the definition of extortion is: the demanding payment of money, property or services, while threatening to commit an illegal act if that is not fulfilled.

      I would hope that a regulator would be a bit more conservative about extending its domain where it doesn't have the right to.

      I think the more important word to understand in all this is "agree". Certainly, if a person has not read and understood a contract (read: most Facebook users) then they cannot be said to have truly agreed to the terms.

    6. Re:hyperbolic by pmotuja · · Score: 1

      Does facebook define friendship anywhere on their site? Just curious. All those friends you can get and all. I would think somewhere, maybe in the fine print even, they define what it means. Does it quantify how many friends you really need? Does it define what a good relationship is? Does it explain where it got the idea it was okay to stalk people all over the web?

    7. Re:hyperbolic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So you're fine with being tracked without your knowledge on sites that have nothing to do with FB, Goog or APL (all three tracking your information for their own purposes) asides from having this tiny comment area / like button (it says this even in the summary). Once you have an account, you cannot opt out without going out of your way every time.

      Even if you have a techie way with adblock or whatever, do you expect the common person to know about potential privacy issues let alone defend against them?

      There's a reason why the EU forces websites to display a warning about cookie usage UPFRONT. Was just in Paris -- if the website doesn't have the standard warning you get this huge red screen indicating that they may use your usage information before letting you go to the site.

      To me this regulator is doing just enough - you let users know what companies are doing and then let the user decide if that's okay. Slapping a fine on non-compliance, I'm cool with.

    8. Re:hyperbolic by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Even voluntary participation has to follow laws. It is that simple.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  8. I am the first in line to hate on Facebook, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is getting ridiculous. People use Facebook even when there are more informative sites around. People post personal stuff after being told about the dangers of doing so. People are idiots. Facebook does take advantage of that, but no more so than any other mega corporation. This nitpicking just makes critics look petty. Provide a better alternative and make it known. It can't be that difficult if Facebook is that bad.

  9. Such problems with facebook. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

    I keep hearing about all these people feeling betrayed and abused by Facebook but what I'm not hearing is these same people deciding to no longer use Facebook.

    Take some control of your life, nimrods!

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:Such problems with facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Well here's one story. I once had a facebook account for some months, but deleted the account when they came up with their "we can do anything"-EULA changes.

      I use noscript and have banned facebook scripts.

      Still why the hell should i have to do that? I don't know if it's even 100% effective. So how am i supposed to defend myself against that?

    2. Re:Such problems with facebook. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      The problem is the network effect. The value of Facebook provided by Facebook is negligible, but the value of Facebook provided by your friends is significant. It's hard to be the one person in a social group that doesn't use Facebook. That said, I keep hearing how good Facebook is for organising things, so why not encourage your Facebook-using friends to use it to all agree to quit at the same time: if half of your friends don't quit Facebook, then the value of Facebook is suddenly a lot lower.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:Such problems with facebook. by CAPSLOCK2000 · · Score: 1

      That's why the Germans claim Facebook uses extortion. Apparently it is so hard to leave / never join that it can not be expected from a reasonable person. Hence extortion; users are forced to join Facebook against there will. Not with a gun, but with social pressure.

  10. Fear of isolation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The fear of social isolation is exploited to get access to the complete surfing activities of users."

    The only time in my life I felt socially isolated was before I dragon-punched Facebook out of my life. Direct correlation.

  11. really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    isn't this argument valid for some other companies as well ???

  12. Re:I am the first in line to hate on Facebook, but by Sique · · Score: 5, Informative

    The difference here is the European understanding of "privacy". While in the U.S., there is this "expectation of privacy", which is routinely denied if you are using a publicly accessible website, the European understanding is different. Here, privacy means that you have the right to control which information about you is publicly available and who has a right to make use of it. This was first established in 1983 in the landmark decision of the German Constitutional Court, which established the informational self-determination.

    --
    .sig: Sique *sigh*
  13. NOT optional, user-paid privacy please! by Green+Salad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I respect that facebook needs to make money. I would like to see a user-paid option, thus allowing me to participate by spending my money to pay my own way, so that facebook can monetize me directly filter out all ads and protect my private info.

    Participation was not optional, in my case, if I wanted to keep my high-paying IT job. Our clients used facebook as the sole method for registration and tracking in mandatory activities.

    I objected strenuously on principle and offered several workable alternatives, including asking the organizers to make up a fictitious account for me to use (I didn't want to be the one committing fraud) and was told I was being a "P.I.T.A." about privacy, as the whole point was to use a single, consolidated, low-cost method for tracking/reporting registration, participation, etc.

    1. Re:NOT optional, user-paid privacy please! by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

      Participation was not optional, in my case, if I wanted to keep my high-paying IT job. Our clients used facebook as the sole method for registration and tracking in mandatory activities.

      So? Just create a throw-away email account, use that only for Facebook and put as little info into your profile as you can manage, all work related. Then, all you have to do is delete your account when you're through with it, along with the email address (or, if that's not practical, just walk away from that address) and nobody who knows you only through Facebook can find you.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    2. Re: NOT optional, user-paid privacy please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The fact that you think a throw away email address prevents facebook from tracking you, logged in or not, shows how unprepared you are to comment on this subject.

      Cookies now include IP and MAC addresses which are correlated by ad servers. Once they get your login once, they can track that ip across other services, many of which serve facebook ads or their subsidiaries and holdings. Statistical models are built to infer habits and profile browsers and devices so they can figure out if it's you even on new device.

      You are way, way fucking behind the times. The NSA spends less on tracking than facebook and google do. Let that sink in for a bit.

    3. Re:NOT optional, user-paid privacy please! by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Facebook, Google, etc. create profiles for everyone they see on the Internet, even people who don't sign up for accounts. Creating an account links his actual identity to that profile, allowing Facebook to tie that anonymous profile to things his friends may have said or posted that included him. As he's forced to log in from various devices, they can figure out if he prefers iOS or Android. By looking at who he associates with, they can make some pretty good guesses about his income and his leanings on various topics. And, as I already mentioned, they can link in the earlier data they collected about him on various sites, allowing them to start delivering personalized ads or sell his information to interested parties.

      Deleting the account after that doesn't do much of anything since, at least in the States, it just deactivates it until you log in again. All of the data is still there. And in the meantime, they still have cookies on your machines, signatures for each of them, and they've been able to put a name and face to that anonymous profile. They'll still track you as you go around the Internet, account or not.

    4. Re:NOT optional, user-paid privacy please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should also add: they now have his "agreement to terms" opening up all that data they have on him for greater exploitation.

    5. Re: NOT optional, user-paid privacy please! by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

      The fact that you think a throw away email address prevents facebook from tracking you, logged in or not, shows how unprepared you are to comment on this subject.

      I'm talking about somebody who uses it only for work, and only at work. Let them get my IP address and even my MAC address; it's not my computer, not my connection. Once I leave that company, there's nothing left that they can track.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    6. Re:NOT optional, user-paid privacy please! by iampiti · · Score: 1

      I came to comment this. I think it's a good solution for both parties except for the part that would force Facebook to put a price on the data they usually gather about you. It's reasonable to think they would want to divulge that information.
      Anyway I think all services that are currently paid for with the data they gather about their users should have an option to pay with money. That would include not only Facebook, Google and other Internet services but also Windows 10. Many mobile apps have two options: One free with ads, one paid for without ads.

    7. Re: NOT optional, user-paid privacy please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure there is somethin left: your usage pattern, the websites you tend to open in a certain order, at a certain time, the speed at which you type, which words you type in which way, which words you tend to use and at what frequency.

      And much much more which all together make you unique.

  14. You do realize... by tlambert · · Score: 2

    You do realize...

    If your friend didn't bother to contact you personally, and if none of your mutual friends bothered to contact you either, and no one happened to mention the upcoming wedding in your presence...

    It may not have been an accidental oversight...

    Right?

    1. Re:You do realize... by fluffernutter · · Score: 2

      In this case we don't have any mutual acquaintances, and no that wasn't the situation. At any rate, they later expressed to me that there was another couple that was missed as well due to not being on Facebook. Perhaps they were just being polite, don't know, don't really care. At any rate, this is something that happens.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    2. Re:You do realize... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      It's the same as back in the days when not everyone had a mobile phone. People would send out invites to social events by just texting everyone in their phone's memory, and if you were not in it then you were likely to be overlooked or get a last minute on-the-day email. Not deliberately, but because human nature is forgetful and lazy and 19 out of 20 people they would think to invite are in their phone.

      Also remember that in the EU we have positive freedom, which means companies generally aren't allowed to use making your social life suck as motivation for you to give up data or pay for services.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  15. Re: STREISAND REBUILDS HER FACE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Verklemmt.

  16. I think you missed the part... by tlambert · · Score: 1

    I think you missed the part where there was "something of value" involved. Or the part where we were talking about Facebook.

    Either way, you missed the boat on one of the major prerequisites for it to be extortion.

    1. Re:I think you missed the part... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good to know privacy is of no value to you. I guess you don't mind NSA spying on you.

    2. Re: I think you missed the part... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or he understands how the internet works and that data gets logged.

  17. No, it's not. by tlambert · · Score: 1, Insightful

    isn't this argument valid for some other companies as well ???

    No, it's not.

    It's only valid for companies with deep pockets, which can have money extorted out of them by governments who have basically squelched their technology sector to the point there's no way in hell it could come up with something competitive with the company they are attempting to extort money from.

    1. Re:No, it's not. by tempmpi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The issue here is not deep pockets or not, the issue are networking effects that create an defacto monopoly. If you got such an defacto monopoly many people are forced into doing business with you. If people don't like your terms, that can't just switch to your competition, because your competition isn't offering the same network. A company with such a defacto monopoly is not allowed to abuse this monopoly. They are not allowed to use it extend their market share other areas or force terms on users that they wouldn't accept if healthy competetion was present.

      --
      Jan
  18. Germany and your profits by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    Is it still worth the risk and costs? How to get your products over the new German digital wall.
    You users expect the same US freedom of speech and freedom after speech they get from a trusted US brand.
    Users know what they are signing up for and what they are doing with a US product and service they enjoy and want to use.
    Germans reach out to a US brand and want to enjoy and use that brands features and services.

    What is the solution given a new digital wall now surrounds Germany?

    Create German support services in the USA? A lot of great people graduate from US universities with German skills? Hire them in the USA.
    Get Germans to connect to the USA. If a German company wants to buy and sell, let them do it in the USA.
    Avoid Germany but understand the needs of Germans in Germany looking for German products and services that can be supported via the USA.
    For the Germans reading slashdot trying to understand what that US web service offering Germany service would have to look like on online, think back to reverse digital version of the Geschenkdienst und Kleinexporte.
    The USA did not interact with Germany, Germany did not legally interact with the USA but the US product or service arrives in Germany via a payment to a trusted third nation.
    Take the train or dive to a nation like Switzerland to build up funds in a US service?
    A US server and brand, selling into the EU, products been sent into Germany via a third company in the EU or a by using a company totally outside EU, Germany or USA.
    Totally avoiding any direct legal contact with the German government from the USA or a US company having to function in Germany.
    Germans would have to absorb the repackaging and extra costs in the postage but could enjoy the freedom of speech, after speech, freedom to shop, review products only offered in the USA.

    The US social media site hosted only in the USA becomes an interactive version of Geschenke in die DDR with the same complex postage and payment systems.
    The more the German government bans US products and services the more people in Germany will talk about and then enjoy US freedoms.
    US brands will respond with innovative ways to get their products and services into Germany and help Germans set up accounts.
    Any VPN and site encryption will have to withstand the skills and spending of the German government trying to detect and report any Germans using that service. Hire the smartest staff in the USA to keep Germans safe in Germany as they use US networks and services.
    A new digital wall will not keep Germans away from US freedoms. Very smart people in the US will always find ways to sell into Germany again.
    Germans had to use tunnels, microlight aircraft, cars and hot air balloons to try and escape bad parts of Germany.

    US brands now have to be as creative to help their German customers trapped in Germany enjoy digital freedom again.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re:Germany and your profits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you on drugs?

      The solution is to not break the law. Do you know how many privacy laws Facebook breaks and gets away with it? All of them.

    2. Re:Germany and your profits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The downside for the US companies to pursuing this plan would be that they would not be able to hide their profits in Europe. They would have to pay US taxes.

      Freedom isn't free.

  19. Other apps also.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My choice is forced. WhatsApp forces you to give access to whole contact list, I cant add few selected contacts to whatzapp. They upload contacts to cloud. My concent is immaterial since the contact never concented or ticked "I Agree", which is illegal. If I keep my status private, I cant see others status even if thier status is public.

    1. Re: Other apps also.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get an extra phone, keep it on wifi and charging at home. Remote desktop or ssh i to it to use it. Can't do that, hey a better phone /network. Or don't use the app.

  20. After much consideration by GeekWithAKnife · · Score: 1


    Fuck facebook.

    --
    A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
  21. Get the hell out of Dodge! by CanEHdian · · Score: 1

    I'd leave Germany. Until things change. Too much hassle about Streetview? Sure, Germany. Poof! Gone. Happy now? Cr*p about news headlines and linking to articles? Sure. Poof. Gone. Oh and we'll also voluntarily remove any other links to your newspapers. Happy now? Oh? No? Oh we can do it again? Sure. Bang! Back. Just turn off Facebook.de with a nice explataory page with politicians' contact information to express unhappiness.

    --
    When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
    1. Re:Get the hell out of Dodge! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      German citizens know better than to write their representatives to "express unhappiness". Ending up on a politischesbestrafungliste mean immediate termination of employment with no possibilities to ever being hired again. Ever. Having one member of your family on one means you're barred from running for office and will have to struggle to even find or hold on a job. The strong political stability of Germany comes at a price, but it's a price the population is willing to pay.

    2. Re: Get the hell out of Dodge! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or they could just redirect to RenRen, the Chinese version of Facebook. If China got their shit together, employing strong privacy laws and meeting EU regulations, they could make a real embarrassment of Facebook.

    3. Re:Get the hell out of Dodge! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you talking about pre-1945 Germany or is your nonsense just made up on the fly?

  22. Re:I am the first in line to hate on Facebook, but by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    In a way it's surprising that the US doesn't have something similar, because in a very pro-capitalist society your personal data is an asset to be owned and monetized. Some people have aspects of their personal data covered by intellectual property laws, e.g. actors and their likenesses, but the average person doesn't seem to have any ownership of their data at all.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  23. Re:I am the first in line to hate on Facebook, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In a way it's surprising that the US doesn't have something similar

    Sure, if "in a way" you mean in a way that doesn't understand the US or capitalism

    in a very pro-capitalist society your personal data is an asset to be owned and monetized.

    You don't understand capitalism. In a very pro-capitalist society, people are responsible for protecting their own assets, including your personal data.

    Your personal data is information. In a very pro-capitalist society, the way to protect information is for you to privately lock it up like a trade secret back before copyright law existed.

    Yes, copyright, because that's what this is really about. Personal information is just another type of idea. Privacy laws is just a special kind of copyright law, pertaining specifically to ideas about you personally. The thing is, copyright isn't very pro-capitalist. It's giving government authority to grant temporary monopolies on who can use/profit from an idea, when ideas in a truly capitalist society would be free to spread and be used whoever it may ("information wants to be free")

    And this is where you don't understand the US. The US is not some 110% pro-capitalist paradise. It's a constitutional republic, and in that constitution it includes a copyright clause. But that clause is only for "promotion of arts and sciences", so your personal information usually falls out of line. So it's not surprising the US lacks privacy laws to protect people from private corporations (spying by government is a whole other can of worms). The US government simply wasn't granted such authority from its Constitution.

  24. OpenFacebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Interesting. Perhaps this makes it possible to force facebook et al. into providing an interface for bi-directional communication with other social networks - just like users of status.net/GNU social, Friendica, Diaspora, Mastdon, pump.io... can communicate with each other w/o having to join every single network.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OStatus
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pump.io

  25. Facebook can't do that either. by tlambert · · Score: 1

    Or, alternatively... In Europe, we actually have pretty strong protections on our privacy, where companies aren't allowed to just grab all the data they can and run with it. Facebook tries to grab all our data and run with it, and unsurprisingly are being found to be outside the law.

    Facebook can't do that either.

    You have to agree to it. No one requires you to agree with the terms of service: you just don't get to have service, if you don't.

    Just because the Germans haven't been able to develop their own version of Facebook, doesn't mean that they should have any say in how the U.S. version of Facebook is run.

    I hope Facebook does the same thing that a lot of other services do, when Europe passes some dumbass law and tries to fine them: pull the heck out of the country.

    Remember how well the Spanish news sites did, after they tried to charge Google news excerpting fees?

    1. Re: Facebook can't do that either. by prefec2 · · Score: 1

      You can disagree with FB, but then you are excluded from many social processes including invitations of your friends and birthdays. This is a real danger for the individual.