FCC Passes Sweeping Rules Protecting Your Online Privacy

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
At this point, anything is better than the way it was before. Obviously that's not saying much, and there are still a ton of ways companies will get around the new rules, but every little bit helps.

The rules, passed Thursday in a 3-to-2 vote by the Federal Communications Commission, require Internet providers, such as Comcast and Verizon, to obtain their customers' explicit consent before using or sharing that behavioral data with third parties, such as marketing firms. Also covered by that requirement are health data, financial information, Social Security numbers and the content of emails and other digital messages. The measure allows the FCC to impose the opt-in rule on other types of information in the future, but certain types of data, such as a customer's IP address and device identifier, are not subject to the opt-in requirement. The rules also force service providers to tell consumers clearly what data they collect and why, as well as to take steps to notify customers of data breaches.
 
What needs to happen is that all private information needs to be held to the same standard as HIPAA PHI. Where companies that handle it guard it, cannot sell it and face stiff fines for breaches.

It's mostly the same information, so wtf.
 
It only applies to broadband providers, but still better than nothing.
 
Riccochet said:
What needs to happen is that all private information needs to be held to the same standard as HIPAA PHI. Where companies that handle it guard it, cannot sell it and face stiff fines for breaches.

It's mostly the same information, so wtf.
Click to expand...

Wasn't it supposed to be cool to be against government regulation of businesses? I remember entire threads filled with calls to disband the FCC.
 
Riccochet said:
What needs to happen is that all private information needs to be held to the same standard as HIPAA PHI. Where companies that handle it guard it, cannot sell it and face stiff fines for breaches.

It's mostly the same information, so wtf.
Click to expand...
Shit. I just got a letter in the mail from the "Office of the City Manager" on the 29th floor of city hall. It was about some third party sewer line insurance where they want $120 a year. Apparently the city gets royalties to support community gardens and urban agriculture for pimping out all the residents with this crap.

Edit: I guess I should be grateful this actually came from the city and they didn't give my info to the third party.
 
Armenius said:
Great! So now can they move on to explicitly banning bandwidth caps?
Click to expand...

Won't happen, at least not anytime soon. ISPs will fight tooth and nail to stop anything that prevents from from fucking over customers. I mean how many times have ATT, Comcast, and industry SuperPAC funded congress members grilled the FCC over decisions recently?
 
evilsofa said:
Wasn't it supposed to be cool to be against government regulation of businesses? I remember entire threads filled with calls to disband the FCC.
Click to expand...


that was back when the FCC got baited into putting useless shit in that internet protection bill a few years back just so they could get it on the voters ballot.. FCC has come a long way since that fiasco.

Tiberian said:
Now the weaseling begins to find loopholes and ways around this and how to profit from it just like they've been doing already.
Click to expand...

easy.. "signing this contract will remove your right to being notified about how the data we record about your service use and how we use it" "if you don't agree, your service will be terminated"..
 
Last edited:
Tiberian said:
Now the weaseling begins to find loopholes and ways around this and how to profit from it just like they've been doing already.
Click to expand...
It's not like they need to try very hard. They'll simply tack all this into a mailer with a box you check with your signature if you want to continue using their service. So you can either explicitly give up your personal information "willingly" or do without internet.
 
While I think privacy is important, I strongly object to the (appointed, not elected) FCC board having the ability to pass rules which have the force of law. Really, this should be something that goes through congress. FCC makes a recommendation with all their reasoning, and then the elected representatives can debate it and pass or kill it.
 
Mohonri said:
While I think privacy is important, I strongly object to the (appointed, not elected) FCC board having the ability to pass rules which have the force of law. Really, this should be something that goes through congress. FCC makes a recommendation with all their reasoning, and then the elected representatives can debate it and pass or kill it.
Click to expand...

Our elected representatives can't even pass a bill to keep people on the no-fly list from buying guns, and you want them to govern all that the FCC does? They'd still be arguing over whether to implement 2400 baud modems if they were in charge of that stuff.
 
evilsofa said:
Our elected representatives can't even pass a bill to keep people on the no-fly list from buying guns, and you want them to govern all that the FCC does? They'd still be arguing over whether to implement 2400 baud modems if they were in charge of that stuff.
Click to expand...
Precisely my point! If it's too complicated for them to understand, then in all likelihood they shouldn't be making laws about it :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top