FCC Passes Sweeping Rules Protecting Your Online Privacy

Discussion in 'HardForum Tech News' started by HardOCP News, Oct 27, 2016.

  1. HardOCP News

    HardOCP News [H] News

    Messages:
    0
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 1969
    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.
     
  2. Tiberian

    Tiberian DILLIGAFuck

    Messages:
    5,725
    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2012
    Now the weaseling begins to find loopholes and ways around this and how to profit from it just like they've been doing already.
     
  3. Riccochet

    Riccochet Off Topic Award

    Messages:
    21,496
    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    Incoming $10 a month charge to "opt out"
     
    DocSavage likes this.
  4. DocSavage

    DocSavage 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,409
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2002
    Armenius likes this.
  5. Armenius

    Armenius I Drive Myself to the [H]ospital

    Messages:
    17,254
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    Great! So now can they move on to explicitly banning bandwidth caps?
     
    Wierdo and cyclone3d like this.
  6. Riccochet

    Riccochet Off Topic Award

    Messages:
    21,496
    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    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.
     
    Armenius and DedEmbryonicCe11 like this.
  7. -PK-

    -PK- [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,798
    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    It only applies to broadband providers, but still better than nothing.
     
  8. BloodyIron

    BloodyIron 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,441
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    What about those national security letters?
     
  9. evilsofa

    evilsofa [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,078
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    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.
     
    Wierdo likes this.
  10. DocSavage

    DocSavage 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,409
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2002
    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.
     
  11. Derangel

    Derangel [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    17,365
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    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?
     
    Armenius likes this.
  12. sirmonkey1985

    sirmonkey1985 [H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010

    Messages:
    21,175
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008

    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.

    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: Oct 27, 2016
  13. Riccochet

    Riccochet Off Topic Award

    Messages:
    21,496
    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    CMS enforces HIPAA.
     
  14. jfreund

    jfreund Gawd

    Messages:
    951
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2006
    So the DSL provider in my area is exempt, since their speeds don't qualify as "broadband".
     
    DocSavage likes this.
  15. mope54

    mope54 [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,428
    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    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.
     
  16. Mohonri

    Mohonri [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,735
    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    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.
     
  17. evilsofa

    evilsofa [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,078
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    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.
     
  18. Mohonri

    Mohonri [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,735
    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    Precisely my point! If it's too complicated for them to understand, then in all likelihood they shouldn't be making laws about it :)