Slashdot Mirror
Democratic Senators Propose 'Privacy Bill of Rights' To Prevent Websites From Sharing Or Selling Sensitive Info Without Opt-In Consent (arstechnica.com)
Democratic Senators Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) today proposed a "privacy bill of rights" that would prevent Facebook and other websites from sharing or selling sensitive information without a customer's opt-in consent. The proposed law would protect customers' web browsing and application usage history, private messages, and any sensitive personal data such as financial and health information. Ars Technica reports: Markey teamed with Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) to propose the Customer Online Notification for Stopping Edge-provider Network Transgressions (CONSENT) Act. You can read the full legislation here. "Edge providers" refers to websites and other online services that distribute content over consumer broadband networks. Facebook and Google are the dominant edge providers when it comes to advertising and the use of customer data to serve targeted ads. No current law requires edge providers to seek customers' permission before using their browsing histories to serve personalized ads. The online advertising industry uses self-regulatory mechanisms in which websites let visitors opt out of personalized advertising based on browsing history, and websites can be punished by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) if they break their privacy promises.
The Markey/Blumenthal bill's stricter opt-in standard would require edge providers to "obtain opt-in consent from a customer to use, share, or sell the sensitive customer proprietary information of the customer." Edge providers would not be allowed to impose "take-it-or-leave-it" offers that require customers to consent in order to use the service. The FTC and state attorneys general would be empowered to enforce the new opt-in requirements. The bill would require edge providers to notify users about all collection, use, and sharing of their information. The bill also requires edge providers "to develop reasonable data security practices" and to notify customers about data breaches that affect them.
The Markey/Blumenthal bill's stricter opt-in standard would require edge providers to "obtain opt-in consent from a customer to use, share, or sell the sensitive customer proprietary information of the customer." Edge providers would not be allowed to impose "take-it-or-leave-it" offers that require customers to consent in order to use the service. The FTC and state attorneys general would be empowered to enforce the new opt-in requirements. The bill would require edge providers to notify users about all collection, use, and sharing of their information. The bill also requires edge providers "to develop reasonable data security practices" and to notify customers about data breaches that affect them.
A good effort in principle but ultimately worthless, all websites/apps will do is add "you explicitly consent to allow X" in their TOS and carry on as usual. a firmer action would be to make any TOS that is over 1 A4 page long legally invalid.
Precisely what I came into here to comment on. You nailed it. No teeth.
Good is never enough, when you dream of being great!
When you're the minority party in congress you can make a bunch of "good effort" bills that sound great to the voting masses but have no prayer of passing so as to not anger your donors.
Both sides do it. I'm honestly not sure why we even let minority parties propose bills when the answer is just going to be "haha, no." Even if it was a damn good bill that everyone agreed on, they'd still block it simply so they could propose it themselves. Passing a bill is a good metric on your record. Hell, remember how much they fought over RomneyCare? They'd even fight it on the principle that the other side proposed it.
Signing a digital contract saying that a business may study my information but may not share additional copies with other people doesn't have anything to do with the first amendment issue at all. Nor does the bill outlining civil recourse for businesses failing to provide adequate security to uphold their side of such contract.
What the bill actually seems to describe: Businesses that obtain information based on a digital contract have a responsibility to maintain adequate security to justify their claims of who they will and will not share that information to. Third parties obtaining information in bad faith are also the responsibility of the business. The Federal Trade Commission is defining some of the terms that apply to such digital contracts and making legal distinctions between some of them. There's more to it than that, but it's Democrat sponsored and it's unlikely to be passed. So I don't recommend anyone actually read it.
Inheritance is the sincerest form of nepotism.
iamhassi blathered:
How can legislators not see that this is worthless? We will have a pop up on every website/app demanding CONSENT and if we click NO the website/app won't let us have access. Congratulations on passing a law to add another pop up to all websites and apps.
From TFS:
Edge providers would not be allowed to impose "take-it-or-leave-it" offers that require customers to consent in order to use the service.
If you're going to opine about something, you might want to try knowing what the fuck you're talking about ...
Check out my novel.
pak9rabid snorted:
Because they don't care. This is just a song-and-dance to their constituents to look like give a shit.
No. No, it's not.
First of all, Markey and Blumenthal's constituents neither know nor care about privacy considerations on the Web. Like most Americans (and Brits, and Aussies, and the bulk of Internet users everywhere), they haven't bothered to inform themselves about it, nor do they want to, because it's too confusing and "technical" for them to grasp. Secondly, there really hasn't been any groundswell of demand for such protections. Most of the outrage has been generated by journalists - some of whom actually do know a little bit about the implications of data breaches.
More to the point, both Markey and Blumenthal are among the most tech-savvy legislators in Congress. They've both been opponents of restrictions on encryption and the efforts of law enforcement to get Congress to mandate back doors for their convenience. They're both suspicious of stingray cell phone data collection. They genuinely give a damn about their constituents' rights online and off - not because that plays well with voters, but because it's a subject that goes to the heart of Constitutional protections against unjustified government intrusion on individual liberty.
Oh, and because corporate intrusions on individual privacy are, in the age of AI, potentially an even greater threat to civil liberties, as evidenced by Cambridge Analytica's conveyance of FB users' private information to the ethical black hole that now occupies the Oval Office.
How your fact-free, unsupported opinion on this topic achieved plus ANYTHING "Informative" is beyond me ...
Check out my novel.