6 ms·

> We used to live in a society where webmasters' rights to the fruits of their labor weren't trampled on by inane regulation (to this degree at least) So someo

> We used to live in a society where webmasters' rights to the fruits of their labor weren't trampled on by inane regulation (to this degree at least) So someone having a copy of my data that I wish be removed is trampling on a webmaster's rights? That makes no sense whatsoever. > Now if you run a website in the EU, any user who signs up to it has control over the contents of your servers This isn't even true. They have _a tiny bit more_ control of what you can do _with their_ data. That's it. Buckle up because this type of regulation is only going to happen more frequently and in large part because of your attitude that it is "your" data versus the user's data.

jimmaswell 8y ago
But it's not "their" data. It's the webmaster's data. It rightfully belongs to the webmaster. It just happens to pertain to the user. There is no justification for that information still belonging to the user after the user surrenders it to the website.
- anonymouz 8y ago
  > But it's not "their" data. It's the webmaster's data. No > It rightfully belongs to the webmaster. No, you are completely wrong here. The basic point of the legislation (and other privacy legislation in the EU that came before GDPR) is that a users personal data absolutely does not belong to the someone else once collected.
  - jimmaswell 8y ago
    I obviously wasn't talking in a legal sense, I was talking in a "what's actually right and good" sense. The law doesn't make something right. Rightfully, the information belongs to the webmaster. Under GDPR, users get to put a leash and muzzle on webmasters.
    - anonymouz 8y ago
      Well, I'd say it's also not at all rightful in a "what's actually right and good" sense. And as others have pointed out, no the users don't get to put a leash on webmasters, it just allows the users to retain some degree of control over what the webmasters are allowed to do with personal information about their users. But feel free to argue that it is your moral right to sell user's e-mail addresses to some spammer or whatever.
      - jimmaswell 8y ago
        "users don't get to put a leash on webmasters, it just allows the users to retain some degree of control over what the webmasters are allowed to do" I'll let that excerpt speak for itself. And yes, I'm arguing it's anyone's moral right to profit off information voluntarily entered into their website unless a specific agreement was made on the website to the contrary.
        GordonS 8y ago
        > And yes, I'm arguing it's anyone's moral right to profit off information voluntarily entered into their website unless a specific agreement was made on the website to the contrary Views like this are exactly why we need the GDPR. I find it utterly ridiculous - disgusting even - that you really believe you have the right to do whatever you want with someone else's personal information. When you provide an email address, physical address, name or other PI, it's with the expectation of it being used for a specific purpose - you should absolutely not give you the right to sell that information to the highest bidder.
        jimmaswell 8y ago
        And I find it equally disgusting that you think users' feelings are more important than webmasters' property rights.
        lovich 8y ago
        Holy shit man, did you come right out of "Atlas Shrugged"? This isnt even users feelings, this is data that can a:have monetary value and b:can be plain wrong and damage a user. Do you think that merely by observing data you have right to it? Do you not believe in any IP law? If you agree with any type of IP law then you are just being hypocritical by insisting that webmasters get to take and use whatever data they come across
    - ricardobeat 8y ago
      I'm sure the person you're replying to is also talking in the 'rightful' sense. While the data collected technically belongs to you, it can still be a privacy violation. This is extremely important on the web where it's very easy to share that data, make it public or accidentally leak it.
      - wilsonnb 8y ago
        It can be a privacy violation but the idea of a fundamental right to privacy is not universally supported like free speech. If it is a fundamental right, how far does it go? Should I be able to sue you for watching me walk in a public place? Photographing me? Video taping me? What about a privately owned but still public place? There are a lot of questions here that I think people tend to skip over about users owning information about them and being able to control it.
        lovich 8y ago
        There are lots of laws against following someone and observing/recording every move they make. Making some observations out your window of cars passing by is something no one ever had a problem with. Taking down every single identifier you could and coordinating with others to track that person, for a profit, is something that would not be kosher in meat space. Why this different just because it's on a computer?
        jimmaswell 8y ago
        Would any of that actually be illegal in "meat space" as long as it didn't qualify as harassment?
        lovich 8y ago
        Would any data collection on the "internet" actually be illegal as long as it didn't qualify as illegal data collection? That's the whole point of the law is to say it's illegal, the same way laws made stalking people illegal
        8y ago
    - quietdean 8y ago
      > The law doesn't make something right. I absolutely agree. If you feel a law is wrong, it is your absolute right to say so and demand change. This is the basis of all law and civilisation. The consensus of what is right-or-wrong is what makes a society. Go for it.
    - lagadu 8y ago
      > Rightfully, the information belongs to the webmaster. What? Because you just decided that it does? It's people like you why we need GDPR-like laws. I'm curious, what's your stance on the Equifax data breach? They had data that belongs to them and they could do with and treat it as they pleased, right?
  - tomatotomato37 8y ago
    I hate this binary choice between all or nothing Your personal info, username, account settings, marketing anayltics, etc. are definitley you're data and you should be free to have them deleted. The two year old IPs in a server log sitting in backup, or a chance occurrence of your username in a random call stack for some web exception is not your data, and you shouldn't force a business to have to dig through that mound of digital noise to satisfy your deletion needs
    - kingbirdy 8y ago
      You're not required to delete information from archival data such as backups
- rocqua 8y ago
  If I get nude picutures of you, or your mother, daughter etc. is it then "my data"? Am I therefore allowed to do with that data as I wish? I think most people agree that unless those pictures are gathered with very specific consent, subject to many restrictions, they are not "my data". This is obviously an extreme example, but the reasoning extends to more data that is considered sensitive. The point being that "data ownership" is a complicated issue.
  - wilsonnb 8y ago
    Well whoever took the picture is the one that holds the copyright usually so it's more or less that person's data. Pictures probably aren't a good example because they are covered by intellectual property laws.
    - slrz 8y ago
      Then let's move on to credit card details. You gave them to me for payment purposes in the course of doing normal business. Months later, I discover that I can sell my stock of credit card information on the darknet for some nice extra income. Should I be allowed to do that? What if it weren't credit card details but just postal addresses?
      - jimmaswell 8y ago
        The credit card example was already illegal by other, more targeted legislation. Nobody likes getting a lot of junk mail, but it's not the end of the world. I actually got my first credit card from a pre-approved offer found in junk mail.
      - wilsonnb 8y ago
        Yes, you should be able to do that, unless you are reasonably certain that the information might be used to commit credit card fraud/identity theft. If you think they might be used illegally, I believe there are already laws to charge you with that relate to facilitating a crime. If you don't think they will be used illegally, then what's the harm in selling them to someone else?

jimmaswell 8y ago

But it's not "their" data. It's the webmaster's data. It rightfully belongs to the webmaster. It just happens to pertain to the user. There is no justification for that information still belonging to the user after the user surrenders it to the website.

anonymouz 8y ago
> But it's not "their" data. It's the webmaster's data. No > It rightfully belongs to the webmaster. No, you are completely wrong here. The basic point of the legislation (and other privacy legislation in the EU that came before GDPR) is that a users personal data absolutely does not belong to the someone else once collected.
- jimmaswell 8y ago
  I obviously wasn't talking in a legal sense, I was talking in a "what's actually right and good" sense. The law doesn't make something right. Rightfully, the information belongs to the webmaster. Under GDPR, users get to put a leash and muzzle on webmasters.
  - anonymouz 8y ago
    Well, I'd say it's also not at all rightful in a "what's actually right and good" sense. And as others have pointed out, no the users don't get to put a leash on webmasters, it just allows the users to retain some degree of control over what the webmasters are allowed to do with personal information about their users. But feel free to argue that it is your moral right to sell user's e-mail addresses to some spammer or whatever.
    - jimmaswell 8y ago
      "users don't get to put a leash on webmasters, it just allows the users to retain some degree of control over what the webmasters are allowed to do" I'll let that excerpt speak for itself. And yes, I'm arguing it's anyone's moral right to profit off information voluntarily entered into their website unless a specific agreement was made on the website to the contrary.
      - GordonS 8y ago
        > And yes, I'm arguing it's anyone's moral right to profit off information voluntarily entered into their website unless a specific agreement was made on the website to the contrary Views like this are exactly why we need the GDPR. I find it utterly ridiculous - disgusting even - that you really believe you have the right to do whatever you want with someone else's personal information. When you provide an email address, physical address, name or other PI, it's with the expectation of it being used for a specific purpose - you should absolutely not give you the right to sell that information to the highest bidder.
        jimmaswell 8y ago
        And I find it equally disgusting that you think users' feelings are more important than webmasters' property rights.
        lovich 8y ago
        Holy shit man, did you come right out of "Atlas Shrugged"? This isnt even users feelings, this is data that can a:have monetary value and b:can be plain wrong and damage a user. Do you think that merely by observing data you have right to it? Do you not believe in any IP law? If you agree with any type of IP law then you are just being hypocritical by insisting that webmasters get to take and use whatever data they come across
  - ricardobeat 8y ago
    I'm sure the person you're replying to is also talking in the 'rightful' sense. While the data collected technically belongs to you, it can still be a privacy violation. This is extremely important on the web where it's very easy to share that data, make it public or accidentally leak it.
    - wilsonnb 8y ago
      It can be a privacy violation but the idea of a fundamental right to privacy is not universally supported like free speech. If it is a fundamental right, how far does it go? Should I be able to sue you for watching me walk in a public place? Photographing me? Video taping me? What about a privately owned but still public place? There are a lot of questions here that I think people tend to skip over about users owning information about them and being able to control it.
      - lovich 8y ago
        There are lots of laws against following someone and observing/recording every move they make. Making some observations out your window of cars passing by is something no one ever had a problem with. Taking down every single identifier you could and coordinating with others to track that person, for a profit, is something that would not be kosher in meat space. Why this different just because it's on a computer?
        jimmaswell 8y ago
        Would any of that actually be illegal in "meat space" as long as it didn't qualify as harassment?
        lovich 8y ago
        Would any data collection on the "internet" actually be illegal as long as it didn't qualify as illegal data collection? That's the whole point of the law is to say it's illegal, the same way laws made stalking people illegal
        8y ago
  - quietdean 8y ago
    > The law doesn't make something right. I absolutely agree. If you feel a law is wrong, it is your absolute right to say so and demand change. This is the basis of all law and civilisation. The consensus of what is right-or-wrong is what makes a society. Go for it.
  - lagadu 8y ago
    > Rightfully, the information belongs to the webmaster. What? Because you just decided that it does? It's people like you why we need GDPR-like laws. I'm curious, what's your stance on the Equifax data breach? They had data that belongs to them and they could do with and treat it as they pleased, right?
- tomatotomato37 8y ago
  I hate this binary choice between all or nothing Your personal info, username, account settings, marketing anayltics, etc. are definitley you're data and you should be free to have them deleted. The two year old IPs in a server log sitting in backup, or a chance occurrence of your username in a random call stack for some web exception is not your data, and you shouldn't force a business to have to dig through that mound of digital noise to satisfy your deletion needs
  - kingbirdy 8y ago
    You're not required to delete information from archival data such as backups
rocqua 8y ago
If I get nude picutures of you, or your mother, daughter etc. is it then "my data"? Am I therefore allowed to do with that data as I wish? I think most people agree that unless those pictures are gathered with very specific consent, subject to many restrictions, they are not "my data". This is obviously an extreme example, but the reasoning extends to more data that is considered sensitive. The point being that "data ownership" is a complicated issue.
- wilsonnb 8y ago
  Well whoever took the picture is the one that holds the copyright usually so it's more or less that person's data. Pictures probably aren't a good example because they are covered by intellectual property laws.
  - slrz 8y ago
    Then let's move on to credit card details. You gave them to me for payment purposes in the course of doing normal business. Months later, I discover that I can sell my stock of credit card information on the darknet for some nice extra income. Should I be allowed to do that? What if it weren't credit card details but just postal addresses?
    - jimmaswell 8y ago
      The credit card example was already illegal by other, more targeted legislation. Nobody likes getting a lot of junk mail, but it's not the end of the world. I actually got my first credit card from a pre-approved offer found in junk mail.
    - wilsonnb 8y ago
      Yes, you should be able to do that, unless you are reasonably certain that the information might be used to commit credit card fraud/identity theft. If you think they might be used illegally, I believe there are already laws to charge you with that relate to facilitating a crime. If you don't think they will be used illegally, then what's the harm in selling them to someone else?