3 ms·

Back in the day, Heise apparently caught some flack for protecting their readers while still allowing Facebook "likes". It feels to me like the typical Faceboo

by j_s 10y ago

Back in the day, Heise apparently caught some flack for protecting their readers while still allowing Facebook "likes". It feels to me like the typical Facebook approach: do what they want to do or a little bit more, monitor the blowback and walk it back as little as possible only if required to keep everyone happy. https://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/09/03/0115241/heises-two-clicks-for-more-privacy-vs-facebook https://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/09/03/0115241/heises-two-c... https://www.heise.de/extras/socialshareprivacy/ https://www.heise.de/extras/socialshareprivacy/ -> http://panzi.github.io/SocialSharePrivacy/ http://panzi.github.io/SocialSharePrivacy/

sp332 10y ago
That was basically just a trademark dispute. They claimed it was confusing to show a Facebook "like" button that didn't work like Facebook's actual "like" button. It's fine if you use your own assets to indicate what the button does, but you can't use a Facebook logo or their thumb icon.
- j_s 10y ago
  I understand Facebook chose to use trademark law to threaten to block the Heise app id and even their entire domain (any sharing of the paper's content on Facebook). Facebook continues to use every tool at their disposal to protect their expansion of the privacy invasion of their product.
  - sp332 10y ago
    But nothing came of it, and other sites have implemented similar safeguards without being blocked.
    - j_s 10y ago
      Yes. As stated above: monitor the blowback and walk it back as little as possible In this specific case it was indeed only possible to walk it all the way back.