- Joined
- Mar 7, 2018
- Messages
- 61,937
- Reaction score
- 19,052
- Location
- Lower Mainland of BC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
From The Economist
THE PRIVACY wars have begun in earnest. On January 21st France’s data-protection regulator, which is known by its French acronym, CNIL, announced that it had found Google’s data-collection practices to be in breach of the European Union’s new privacy law, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). CNIL hit Google with a €50m ($57m) fine, the biggest yet levied under GDPR.
Google’s fault, said the regulator, had been its failure to be clear and transparent when gathering data from users. Signing up for a Google account on an Android phone means navigating a sea of documents eight-clicks-deep to understand what data about you Google is collecting.
So far, so technical, but the bigger picture is what matters. The fine represents the first volley fired by European regulators at the heart of the business model on which Google and many other online services are based, one which revolves around the frictionless collection of personal data about customers to create personalised advertising. It is the first time that the data practices behind Google’s advertising business, and thus those of a whole industry, have been deemed illegal.
COMMENT:-
Can anyone tell me exactly why I should have to provide information to "Company A" that "Company A" will sell to "Company B" (and "Company C" [and "Company D" {and "Company E" <and "Company ...>}]) so that "Company B" (and ...) can then use the information that I wouldn't give it (them) directly in order to attempt to convince me to buy products from "Company B" (and ...) for free and get a "free" service?
Shouldn't I have the option of paying "Company A" (its real cost plus a reasonable profit) for the services it provides to me directly rather than having "Company A" selling my personal information to "Company B" (and ...)?
The French fine against Google is the start of a war
THE PRIVACY wars have begun in earnest. On January 21st France’s data-protection regulator, which is known by its French acronym, CNIL, announced that it had found Google’s data-collection practices to be in breach of the European Union’s new privacy law, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). CNIL hit Google with a €50m ($57m) fine, the biggest yet levied under GDPR.
Google’s fault, said the regulator, had been its failure to be clear and transparent when gathering data from users. Signing up for a Google account on an Android phone means navigating a sea of documents eight-clicks-deep to understand what data about you Google is collecting.
So far, so technical, but the bigger picture is what matters. The fine represents the first volley fired by European regulators at the heart of the business model on which Google and many other online services are based, one which revolves around the frictionless collection of personal data about customers to create personalised advertising. It is the first time that the data practices behind Google’s advertising business, and thus those of a whole industry, have been deemed illegal.
COMMENT:-
Can anyone tell me exactly why I should have to provide information to "Company A" that "Company A" will sell to "Company B" (and "Company C" [and "Company D" {and "Company E" <and "Company ...>}]) so that "Company B" (and ...) can then use the information that I wouldn't give it (them) directly in order to attempt to convince me to buy products from "Company B" (and ...) for free and get a "free" service?
Shouldn't I have the option of paying "Company A" (its real cost plus a reasonable profit) for the services it provides to me directly rather than having "Company A" selling my personal information to "Company B" (and ...)?