5 ms·

"The facts are clear: we've never sold people's data." - Paul Grewal, VP and Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Facebook Yeah, but that is not what is being alleged. What i

by 3xblah 8y ago

"The facts are clear: we've never sold people's data." - Paul Grewal, VP and Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Facebook Yeah, but that is not what is being alleged. What is being alleged is that you sell access to people's data. This constant recitation of "We do not sell users' data" is like being in late stage litigation where each party's lawyers have chosen their respective arguments. They will cling to them no matter what happens, repeating them ad nauseum until the end. Facebook's argument is "We do not sell people's data". The issue however is not selling people's data. As such, this is not an argument. It is just misdirection. The issue is selling access to people's data. Maybe we could call this "licensing"? Maybe it is more desirable for Facebook to license access to people's data than to sell it. "People's data" might be their friends list, or whatever they have uploaded or contributed to Zuckerberg's website. Facebook's lawyers will not address the issue of selling access to people's data. The reason is clear: they do not have a winning argument. Then we have the matter of metadata. Facebook will let a user download their data, but not their metadata. All that data on her usage patterns on facebook.com and across the web that Facebook collects 24/7/365, e.g. via "Like" beacons and "Sign-In with Facebook". If a user downloads her data from Facebook it does not tell her anything she didn't already know. It is simply the data she submitted to Zuckerberg. But of course he has much more data about her that she is not allowed to see. The question is, "Why not?"

smallgovt 8y ago
I agree Facebook is playing word games, but I think that misses the larger point. That is, Facebook is not selling access to people's data as understood by the lay person. The average person interprets "Facebook sells access to your data" as meaning that someone can pay Facebook to access your individual data. e.g. What sites did 3xblah, specifically, visit last week? This isn't how Facebook's ecosystem works. Advertisers can only target users in large groups. And, there's no way for advertisers to query Facebook's servers for the personal data of a specific user. If you explain exactly what Facebook is doing to the average person they simply don't care (even if you explain all the potential risks to their personal security).
- averageperson 8y ago
  (You are addressing the advertiser ecosystem while the focus here is the app ecosystem.) The "word games" may not be aimed at the "average person". They might be intended to mislead those who have a concern with what Facebook might be doing. For example, it might be part of their job. The FTC is an obvious example, but there are many individuals and groups who are interested in Facebook's activities relating to privacy. Incidentally, how do you know these things about the "average person"? Is there a citation to some studies you have read?
jbob2000 8y ago
Accessing data and selling data are the same thing. For example; “I’m going to give you access to the answer for a math equation”. When you use your access to view the answer, you have the data and you don’t need access any more! “Ok great, 1+1 equals 2, you can take your calculator back now and I’ll call you up if I need access to it again”.
- averageperson 8y ago
  However, legally they are not the same thing.
  - rhizome 8y ago
    That depends on the jurisdiction, doesn't it?
    - averageperson 8y ago
      Is there a jurisdiction that treats ownership and permission to do something as the same thing?
      - rhizome 8y ago
        You mean in the "possession is 9/10ths of the law" sense?
        averageperson 8y ago
        Isn't that a principle relating to proving ownership? If yes, then no, that is not what I meant, although I think I see what you are getting at. What I meant was, "Is there a jurisdiction where a company cannot license (permit) access to data contigent on prior assent to an agreement with conditions on use, duration of use, transfer, etc. such that the licensee does not get the same rights as the owner of the data?"
        8y ago
averageperson 8y ago
Users own the copyright to the stuff they share with Facebook ("users' data"). Facebook acknowledges this explicitly in its Terms. Does FB have sufficient rights to "sell" copies of users' data? Unless the owners of the data give FB permission, FB cannot sell something FB does not own.

by 3xblah 8y ago

smallgovt 8y ago

I agree Facebook is playing word games, but I think that misses the larger point. That is, Facebook is not selling access to people's data as understood by the lay person. The average person interprets "Facebook sells access to your data" as meaning that someone can pay Facebook to access your individual data. e.g. What sites did 3xblah, specifically, visit last week? This isn't how Facebook's ecosystem works. Advertisers can only target users in large groups. And, there's no way for advertisers to query Facebook's servers for the personal data of a specific user. If you explain exactly what Facebook is doing to the average person they simply don't care (even if you explain all the potential risks to their personal security).

averageperson 8y ago
(You are addressing the advertiser ecosystem while the focus here is the app ecosystem.) The "word games" may not be aimed at the "average person". They might be intended to mislead those who have a concern with what Facebook might be doing. For example, it might be part of their job. The FTC is an obvious example, but there are many individuals and groups who are interested in Facebook's activities relating to privacy. Incidentally, how do you know these things about the "average person"? Is there a citation to some studies you have read?

jbob2000 8y ago

Accessing data and selling data are the same thing. For example; “I’m going to give you access to the answer for a math equation”. When you use your access to view the answer, you have the data and you don’t need access any more! “Ok great, 1+1 equals 2, you can take your calculator back now and I’ll call you up if I need access to it again”.

averageperson 8y ago
However, legally they are not the same thing.
- rhizome 8y ago
  That depends on the jurisdiction, doesn't it?
  - averageperson 8y ago
    Is there a jurisdiction that treats ownership and permission to do something as the same thing?
    - rhizome 8y ago
      You mean in the "possession is 9/10ths of the law" sense?
      - averageperson 8y ago
        Isn't that a principle relating to proving ownership? If yes, then no, that is not what I meant, although I think I see what you are getting at. What I meant was, "Is there a jurisdiction where a company cannot license (permit) access to data contigent on prior assent to an agreement with conditions on use, duration of use, transfer, etc. such that the licensee does not get the same rights as the owner of the data?"
        8y ago

averageperson 8y ago

Users own the copyright to the stuff they share with Facebook ("users' data"). Facebook acknowledges this explicitly in its Terms. Does FB have sufficient rights to "sell" copies of users' data? Unless the owners of the data give FB permission, FB cannot sell something FB does not own.