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.
The consent shouldnâ(TM)t be for using or sharing your data, it should be for collecting it in the 1st place
Customer Online Notification for Stopping Edge-provider Network Transgressions (CONSENT) Act
Initially I balked at the introduction of a new bullshit term like "edge-provider", but that's a mighty fine acronym.
And why do online services get specific punishment? Why not apply this to grocery stores? I don't want HyVee telling anyone I buy 10lbs vats of mayonnaise. (don't judge me).
How about we extend "Browsing history" to the real world. I don't think we want companies tracking and who entered their store and what they looked at. The age of ubiquitous cameras, face-recognition, and customer databases is upon us. With a high enough resolution camera, they could even track where your eyeballs are pointed.
Do you want a list of everyone who ever entered a gun store? Do you want to see who shops at the thrift-mart AND the ... gucci-emporium? Do you want your health insurance provider to know how often you stop at McDonalds?
If you're going to squawk at Facebook abusing "customer" data, you might as well take a closer look at the potential abuse of everyone else's databases.
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.