4 ms·

A landmark ruling gives new power to sue tech giants for privacy harms

43 points by johnshades 8y ago

Animats 8y ago
The funny thing here is that the park had a legit reason for taking a fingerprint - you can use it to enter the park with a season pass. They just failed to disclose it properly.[1] [1] https://www.sixflags.com/national/biometric-data-tos https://www.sixflags.com/national/biometric-data-tos
- philipov 8y ago
  Creating a system that requires the collection of personal data does not justify the collection of data. It's begging the question to presume that basing amusement park season passes on biometric authentication is okay in the first place. That's why informed, uncoerced consent is important: that's when people decide whether being able to enter the park is a legitimate use of biometric data. Making it the only option so people have no other choice doesn't do anything to legitimize it.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 8y ago
    Fairly well way off topic, apologies in advance, but this is interesting, to me anyway. This is the only example I've seen in recent years of the use of the phrase begging the question that strictly adheres to a technical definition of the term.[1] 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question
    - nostrademons 8y ago
      Animats's point could easily have been rephrased in a way that avoids the "begging the question" fallacy, though: "Six Flags has a legitimate business interest in ensuring that unlimited-use season passes are used by only the person they are issued to. Of the various ways to identify a person, a fingerprint scan was judged the most convenient, particularly for a water park where people may not want to bring their wallet & ID." Then the conclusion is not assumed by any of the premises, and yet many people (though perhaps not all) would agree with both premises.
      - TheSpiceIsLife 8y ago
        Yes, of course, I agree. I didn’t mean to comment on Animats’ comment, just that philipov’s usage of the term was technically correct.
tareqak 8y ago
The scope of this ruling is limited to Illinois as far as I can tell, but it's a great start.

43 points by johnshades 8y ago

The funny thing here is that the park had a legit reason for taking a fingerprint - you can use it to enter the park with a season pass. They just failed to disclose it properly.[1] [1] https://www.sixflags.com/national/biometric-data-tos https://www.sixflags.com/national/biometric-data-tos

philipov 8y ago
Creating a system that requires the collection of personal data does not justify the collection of data. It's begging the question to presume that basing amusement park season passes on biometric authentication is okay in the first place. That's why informed, uncoerced consent is important: that's when people decide whether being able to enter the park is a legitimate use of biometric data. Making it the only option so people have no other choice doesn't do anything to legitimize it.
- TheSpiceIsLife 8y ago
  Fairly well way off topic, apologies in advance, but this is interesting, to me anyway. This is the only example I've seen in recent years of the use of the phrase begging the question that strictly adheres to a technical definition of the term.[1] 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question
  - nostrademons 8y ago
    Animats's point could easily have been rephrased in a way that avoids the "begging the question" fallacy, though: "Six Flags has a legitimate business interest in ensuring that unlimited-use season passes are used by only the person they are issued to. Of the various ways to identify a person, a fingerprint scan was judged the most convenient, particularly for a water park where people may not want to bring their wallet & ID." Then the conclusion is not assumed by any of the premises, and yet many people (though perhaps not all) would agree with both premises.
    - TheSpiceIsLife 8y ago
      Yes, of course, I agree. I didn’t mean to comment on Animats’ comment, just that philipov’s usage of the term was technically correct.

tareqak 8y ago

The scope of this ruling is limited to Illinois as far as I can tell, but it's a great start.