3 ms·
Oh boy... 32 minutes of revenue. That'll teach em.
by bicknergseng 12y ago
Oh boy... 32 minutes of revenue. That'll teach em.
- iLoch 12y agoActually, time would probably be a much better way of fining companies of that size. Example: "Verizon Fined 1 Week's worth of revenue"
- ezekielrage 12y agoYeah, good luck getting that passed through congress.
- eli 12y agoHow much do you think is appropriate? What Verizon did is clearly wrong and I'm glad the FCC is on top of it... but this ain't exactly the crime of the century.
- gerner 12y agoTrue, but it seems like this is not much a disincentive compared to the revenue potential in that data. Having worked at a number of companies that have acquired data (legally) from a fraction of this many people, one should easily be able to turn those around for a comparable amount of money. I'm not saying there's $100M of revenue here (for 2 million folks). But It seems like the penalty must be much worse than the upside to make the risk adjusted expected value work out in favor of following laws and regulations. I might agree with you if I thought the bad press Verizon is getting was actually quite costly. But I don't.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- eli 12y agoFWIW, I'm pretty sure Verizon lost quite a bit of money on this. Especially since most people don't bother to opt-out even when given proper notice so the illegal act netted them far less than 2 million people.
- mikeash 12y agoAnother comment says that it's about $4 per affected customer. Fines for this sort of thing are typically hundreds or thousands of dollars per incident.
- eli 12y agoNot sure what you mean. This is the largest FCC fine for misuse of marketing data ever.
- bicknergseng 12y agoI'm no legal expert, but I'm pretty sure this is the same legal system that dolled out $1,920,000 to a non-wealthy individual for sharing some Gloria Estefan songs. Justice?