Cambridge Analytica's Parent Pleads Guilty To Breaking UK Data Law (techcrunch.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Cambridge Analytica's Parent Pleads Guilty To Breaking UK Data Law (techcrunch.com)

Posted by msmash on Wednesday January 9, 2019 @04:44AM from the some-justice dept.

Cambridge Analytica's parent company, SCL Elections, has been fined 15,000 Pound (roughly $19,000) in a UK court after pleading guilty to failing to comply with an enforcement notice issued by the national data protection watchdog, the Guardian reports. From a report: While the fine itself is a small and rather symbolic one, given the political data analytics firm went into administration last year, the implications of the prosecution are more sizeable. Last year the Information Commissioner's Office ordered SCL to hand over all the data it holds on U.S. academic, professor David Carroll, within 30 days. After the company failed to do so it was taken to court by the ICO. Prior to Cambridge Analytica gaining infamy for massively misusing Facebook user data, the company, which was used by the Trump campaign, claimed to have up to 7,000 data points on the entire U.S. electorate -- circa 240M people. So Carroll's attempt to understand exactly what data the company had on him, and how the information was processed to create a voter profile of it, has much wider relevance.

37 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

$19,000! by alvinrod · 2019-01-09 04:46 · Score: 3

$19,000!

I'm sure that will show them.
1. Re:$19,000! by jellomizer · 2019-01-09 04:50 · Score: 2
  
  That will fall under petty cash vouchers. How much money did they make from this?
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
2. Re:$19,000! by stealth_finger · 2019-01-09 04:51 · Score: 1
  
  19,000 dollar!
  
  --
  Wanna buy a shirt?
  https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
3. Re:$19,000! by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 04:59 · Score: 0
  
  The ICO issued an enforcement notice against the company, ordering it to comply fully with Carroll’s request, on 4 May 2018. The company had gone into administration the previous day.
  And they wouldn't have had to pay even that if their court appointed administrator had done its job.
  
  SCL: as a non-UK citizen Carroll had no more right to submit a subject access request “than a member of the Taliban sitting in a cave in Afghanistan”.
  Maybe the members of the Taliban should ask for the personal information harvested by the private intelligence analytics companies.
4. Re:$19,000! by Opportunist · 2019-01-09 04:59 · Score: 1
  
  You forgot to raise your pinky to the mouth.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
5. Re:$19,000! by JaredOfEuropa · 2019-01-09 05:13 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Read the article (I know, that's crazy talk, but...) This is not about a massive data breach, nor about the large scale misuse of FB data, but about an individual case brought on by a US professor, as a test case of sorts:
  
  Last year the Information Commissioner’s Office ordered SCL to hand over all the data it holds on U.S. academic, professor David Carroll, within 30 days. After the company failed to do so it was taken to court by the ICO.
  One guy requested all data that CA has on him to be handed over, under UK law. They did not fully comply and he brought the case to the relevant authority, who issued an enforcement notice. The fine is for not complying within the required time frame. In such a case, $19k seems appropriate unless they'd have a history of ignoring similar requests (they don't)
  
  --
  If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
6. Re:$19,000! by AmiMoJo · 2019-01-09 05:22 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Unfortunately it was before GDPR and massive fines came in.
  The bigger loss is that since the company has folded we will probably never get to see exactly what data they had on people. It's likely gone and there isn't much anyone can do about it.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
7. Re:$19,000! by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 07:02 · Score: 0
  
  0.00625 pennies per victim
8. Re:$19,000! by Vitriol+Angst · 2019-01-09 07:49 · Score: 2
  
  This is why we need a law making this kind of data collection illegal. It's an end-run around the right of privacy that would be illegal for a government to do -- so they can hand it off to a private company to abuse you for $ - so much more civilized. The data can't be returned and it an be used to manipulate people.
  There's no ability to deter this once the data is collected because as we noted -- the company can sell it's assets and fold up shop, maybe go offshore and disappear in to the night. The liability needs to be on FaceBook or whomever has privileged information -- I'm looking at you data carriers and ISPs.
  
  --
  >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
9. Re:$19,000! by techno-vampire · 2019-01-09 11:02 · Score: 1
  
  t's likely gone and there isn't much anyone can do about it.
  
  If that data's still useful, it's not gone. There's at least one backup copy stashed in a safe deposit box somewhere, probably in a small European or South American country, if not both.
  
  --
  Good, inexpensive web hosting
10. Re:$19,000! by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 12:01 · Score: 0
  
  If the "bankruptcy estate", I'm not sure about the right English term here, hasn't been dissolved yet and still handles the remaining responsibilities and debts of the company, there is a change that at least some of the data could be marked as intellectual property to be sold or disposed as the relevant laws require.
Pocket change by ZombieCatInABox · 2019-01-09 04:59 · Score: 2, Insightful

That's pocket change. It is clear that from the beginning of the industrial revolution, laws have been drafted by the wealthy, for the benefit of the wealthy.
Fines like these are only meant to give us plebs the illusion of justice. Remember people: Corporations are inherently sociopathic; they're actually incentivised to be that way, by the very nature of the capitalist system.
1. Re:Pocket change by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 05:13 · Score: 0
  
  Fines like these are only meant to give us plebs the illusion of justice.
  It's not working.
Data privacy = LOL by nwaack · 2019-01-09 05:13 · Score: 1

Why do these laws even exist? It's exceedingly clear that even the most egregious misuses of our data get a slap on the wrist at most. At this point it would be cheaper for companies to just go Wild West with our data and pay the tiny fine (if any) after they're caught.
1. Re:Data privacy = LOL by fazig · 2019-01-09 05:48 · Score: 1
  
  At this point it would be cheaper for companies to just go Wild West with our data and pay the tiny fine (if any) after they're caught.
  That is what they have been doing, as far as I can see.
Massively Misusing Facebook Data? by GregMmm · 2019-01-09 05:18 · Score: 2

I've followed this story for a long time. As far as I have read, wasn't all the data they mined from Facebook ok per Facebooks data sharing? There wasn't anything illegal. Is Cambridge Analytica just the canary in the mine? Isn't there other who did the same thing, maybe even now?
Personally, it seems this topic is very politically charged and it's hard to see what the technological issue was, or maybe still is?
1. Re:Massively Misusing Facebook Data? by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 05:25 · Score: 0
  
  Stop whitewashing it
  It was flat out illegal
2. Re:Massively Misusing Facebook Data? by Mr307 · 2019-01-09 05:33 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  https://www.technologyreview.c...
  Very political yep, the wrong side used the data so it must be somehow illegal.
3. Re: Massively Misusing Facebook Data? by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 05:53 · Score: 0
  
  Get fucked, traitor
4. Re: Massively Misusing Facebook Data? by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 05:56 · Score: 0
  
  You first, soyboy NPC.
5. Re:Massively Misusing Facebook Data? by GregMmm · 2019-01-09 06:17 · Score: 1
  
  Ok, still trying to understand. What law did they break. I'm by no means trying justifying what they did, but trying to have a conversation. Again, not easy by how politically charged this topic is. Just look at a couple of responses to my post.
  I read your posting and it says "Cambridge Analytica had harvested the personal data of millions of people's Facebook profiles without their consent and used it for political purpose" Is this illegal? They followed the rules that Facebook allowed and exploited it to the nth degree, and turn massive data into usable data. Anyone could have done this, and most likely were doing it. Who knows, they could still be doing it.
  To me, it showed more of how personal data should be protected and setting laws to do this. Apparently, (sarcasm thick here) a company like Facebook doesn't do the best job of protecting personal data, and like to make a profit alot more.
6. Re:Massively Misusing Facebook Data? by ljw1004 · 2019-01-09 06:31 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Ok, still trying to understand. What law did they break. I'm by no means trying justifying what they did, but trying to have a conversation.
  The law they broke is the UK Data Protection Act. Read the Guardian article. It's all there. Even if, as you say, Cambridge Analytica obeyed the Facebook terms of service, nevertheless...
  (1) Cambridge Analytica held data on people; (2) Under UK law at the time - the "Data Protection Act" - if a company holds data on you, then the company is obliged to divulge that data to you personally upon your request; (3) someone did request their data and Cambridge Analytica ignored the request; (4) the UK's Information Commissioner's Office - which has authority under UK law relating to this part of the Data Protection Act - issued an enforcement notice which in the UK has weight of law, requiring Cambridge Analytica to comply with the request; (5) Cambridge Analytica declined the comply with the request arguing that it didn't have to; (6) a law court found that Cambridge Analytica did indeed have obey the enforcement notice, and had broken the law by not doing so.
  Summary: the law they broke is the UK Data Protection Act.
7. Re:Massively Misusing Facebook Data? by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 06:38 · Score: 0
  
  Ok, still trying to understand. What law did they break.
  In the UK I guess it would be the pre-GDPR Data Protection Act (implementing the EU Data Protection Directive that preceded GDPR).
8. Re:Massively Misusing Facebook Data? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2019-01-09 06:44 · Score: 0
  
  While interesting for the UK, how does this apply as an abuse against US citizens for the previous US election?
  The result, a US citizen's suit in the UK, was tossed.
  
  --
  (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
9. Re:Massively Misusing Facebook Data? by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 07:36 · Score: 0
  
  comprehension fail? Or trolling?
  Why did you bring up the US election when the article is not about it?
  Why did you claim the suit was tossed when the defendant plead guilty and was fined?
10. Re: Massively Misusing Facebook Data? by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 10:42 · Score: 0
  
  Still boggling over who the "sides" are meant to be. Gathering information for a hostile foreign nation is indeed really really illegal, who knew?
  Loving the latest degeneration of the Slashdot Alt-Right "No Backend Servers Available" Clickbait Farm And Home For The Lead and Mercury Poisoned Insane Asylum.
11. Re:Massively Misusing Facebook Data? by GregMmm · 2019-01-10 03:35 · Score: 1
  
  Thank you. Well said.
Cambridge Analytica is now Emerdata by rsilvergun · 2019-01-09 06:06 · Score: 0

They didn't go anywhere, still up to the same shenanigans.

--
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
1. Re:Cambridge Analytica is now Emerdata by knorthern+knight · 2019-01-09 15:42 · Score: 1
  
  I was expecting that "Cambridge Anal-ytica" would re-open as "Oxford Vaginal-ytica"
  
  --
  
  I'm not repeating myself
  I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
2. Re:Cambridge Analytica is now Emerdata by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 20:46 · Score: 0
  
  nope, that would be discrimination...
UK Data Privacy? by PPH · 2019-01-09 06:37 · Score: 1

As a member of the Five Eyes? Who are they trying to fool?
"I am shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here."

--
Have gnu, will travel.
1. Re: UK Data Privacy? by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 10:36 · Score: 0
  
  How dare western national security agencies gather more intelligence than Russian useful idiots!
Wow! by DaMattster · 2019-01-09 07:40 · Score: 1

That's nothing more than a slap on the wrist. Compared with their revenue they've earned as a result of breaking the law, 19,000 is inconsequential. This does nothing to deter bad behavior on the part of corporations. I can just picture the solicitors having a huge laugh.
Me too! by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-09 08:19 · Score: 0

I'm guilty. Give me what they made from this whole scam and I'll be guilty as well!
How many lakhs and crores? by Hognoxious · 2019-01-09 09:34 · Score: 1

15,000 Pounds.

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Wow 19k by twebb72 · 2019-01-10 08:55 · Score: 1

I'm so tired of hearing how 'this ruling, and fine was small -- but SYMBOLIC!'

You knows whats symbolic? Fining them to the point of insolvency, and prison terms for the executives