10 ms·
Edelson’s Class-Action Privacy Suits Could Make Him Tech’s Least Friended Man
- chroem- 12y agoGood. All of this stealing of personal information as a business model is pretty ethically questionable. It's time that these companies come up with a revenue model that doesn't involve facilitating the profiling and persecution of individuals by government agencies and private interests such as HR.
- japhyr 12y ago> Good. All of this stealing of personal information as a business model is pretty ethically questionable. I agree that "stealing personal information as a business model" is something we should minimize. But is Edelson going after companies that are abusing personal information, or just any business that collects information, which might mean a payday for him or his clients?
- mhuffman 12y agoEven collecting it, without explicitly stating what you are going to do with it, should be punished and prohibited. If it can identify you, you should be clear what is to be done with it before you can make an informed decision to give it to someone.
- jsprogrammer 12y agoOn what basis?
- fnordfnordfnord 12y agoBasic human rights?
- yummyfajitas 12y agoSo if I listen to a person speak and deduce that they are Marathi without telling them I plan to do so, I should be punished? Suppose lady has a conversation with me and deduces that I'm a man whore (happened to me a couple of weeks ago). Should she also be punished? Or is it merely the act of making deductions with math that should be punished and prohibited? So if I use intuition and heuristics it's fine, but if I mentally apply Bayes rule I should be punished?
- mhuffman 12y agoIf you are she can do millions of those in your head and use it for profit without telling the people that you are going to do so, and how, then yes. You and her should be punished.
- yummyfajitas 12y agoAccent detection is almost certainly thousands if not millions of calculations. So is white guy detection + overcharging for auto ride, let alone nice shoe detection plus upsell, emotion detection, or any of the thousands of things salespeople do every day.
- mhuffman 12y agoI think you misunderstand what I said -- not millions of calculations, millions of individualized data that uniquely identify a person, then use it without telling the person how. If people know you are using information to serve them a better ad, and agree to it, no problem -- if you have not made that clear, or use it for other purposes that they are not aware of, then it is a big problem and should be illegal.
- jsprogrammer 12y agoWhat about humans who recognize faces?
- yummyfajitas 12y ago
- kbenson 12y agoToday's ethical company that collects more information than needed but uses it responsibly is tomorrow's acquisition of choice by the less ethical mega-corp. These are not people, which you can have at least some hope will maintain some similar level of behavior across their life, these are companies, which are only constrained by the current leadership and the law. In this respect, leadership changes far too easily for my tastes.
- x0x0 12y agoThat would be one of the downsides of outsourcing law enforcement to private, for profit, concerns. I'd support far more funding and enforcement actions for the ftc who can, should, and mostly do act in the public interest. But again, we decided to outsource law enforcement, so it's hardly fair to bitch that the private enforcers act in their own interests, to the extent that their and our interests differ.
- _delirium 12y agoSome of the text-message class actions were pretty justified as well imo. Besides straightforward spam (which like the old fax spam, costs recipients money), there was a whole ecosystem of fraudulent sign-ups to subscription services (sometimes called "cramming"). The telcos were forced to stop enabling that (at least allowing people to opt out) after settling some class-action suits.
- outside1234 12y agoMaking lemonade out of lemons: Is there a list anywhere that tells you about all of the privacy laws you need to be aware of (eg. the Illinois Biometric one) and/or a known-good base privacy policy that a bootstrapper can use?
- ptaipale 12y agoI don't think there can be a one-size-fits-all solution, because what laws you need to be aware depends on where you plan to operate. Within the US only, or internationally? In which parts of the US - I understand there are different laws regarding these things in differen states? And internationally, where? You might even have to choose, because it is conceivable that something which is mandatory in one country is forbidden in another.
- kbenson 12y agoSeems like a specialized consulting firm that gave advice on how best to craft and present your privacy policy (which as the article explains some laws stipulate conditions or items that must be presented to end users) based on jurisdictions would do very well. A lot of up-front cost in legal research which could then be amortized across multiple clients.
- sukilot 12y agoWhat you are describing is called a law firm.
- kbenson 12y agoYes, obviously. But that's like referring to a pit crew as "a bunch of mechanics". Technically correct but ultimately not very useful. Not every firm wants to specialize in this though, and a specialized firm would provide a lot of value. I imagine some exist, but obviously they either aren't very popular, aren't very good, or are ignored.
- jlarocco 12y agoI'm glad somebody is doing this. I think, if they knew, most people wouldn't be happy with how their private data is being used by tech companies.
- rayiner 12y agoIf you don't want to get sued, stick to the straight and narrow. Sell a product in exchange for money that does what you say it will do. Don't collect extensive user data, and protect what you do collect so it doesn't leak into the world. But if you make your money dabbling in legally and morally gray areas, then litigation is how you find out where the lines are drawn. There is frivolous litigation in this space--firms hoping for a quick $100k payout to just go away. But I don't think that's Edelson's business model.
- arfliw 12y agoThat's only a way to avoid getting sued by privacy trolls. Other trolls will still find a way to sue you. Once you are majorly successful, you will get sued regularly. Period.
- rayiner 12y agoIt's a general principle. If you're Apple and you generously replace every product that could have a design or manufacturing defect, you are unlikely to get sued on that basis. But when you're Apple and trying to figure out whether to replace expanding batteries or screens with messed up oleo phobic coating, you don't draw a line in the sand at a point where you won't get sued. You toe the line that balances replacement cost against brand impact and litigation risk.
- sukilot 12y agoApple has a long history of settling class action lawsuits for defective products.
- rayiner 12y agoThey'd rather defend a lawsuit and pay a settlement than preemptively replace all defective products as they come in. Companies make this sort of decision all the time--trading off users for the bottom line. There's nothing evil about it (no point in doing more than what the law requires of you), but if your policy is to do what you can get away with under the law, you should expect litigation over whether you've crossed the line in any given case.
- fragsworth 12y ago> over the last few years many companies have adopted so-called arbitration clauses in which, simply by clicking the “accept terms” button, users waive their rights to join class actions. The move discourages plaintiffs’ lawyers because, unless they can sue on behalf of many clients at once, there is hardly any money in filing cases. “It may only be a matter of time before it is impossible for employees and consumers to file class actions,” Mr. Fitzpatrick said. This is scary, especially considering that many of the big technology companies are monopolies over the types of services they provide, and we are forced to use them if we want to succeed in modern life.
- icebraining 12y agoWhich companies are we forced to use to succeed in modern life?
- lotsofmangos 12y agoOil and water companies.
- icebraining 12y agoDid you read the post I was replying to? Because I don't think your response makes much sense in the context.
- xnull2guest 12y agoLinkedIn has one of the strongest cases.
- vinceguidry 12y agoI deleted my LinkedIn profile a long time ago and never looked back. I can't think of a better example of the meaningless that is only meaningful because other people say it is. I don't even think about LinkedIn unless it's mentioned here, that's how irrelevant to my life it is.
- ForHackernews 12y agoIs there any evidence companies have modified their behavior in response to these lawsuits?
- CPLX 12y agoIf this guy can in fact put Spokeo out of business I would like to volunteer to buy him his first round of drinks in celebration.
- username223 12y ago> Sam Altman, president of Y Combinator, a technology incubator that invests in very young companies, said the lawyer was regarded as “a leech tarted up as a freedom fighter.” "Tarted?" Feel the homophobic side of the Force, Sam. As long as "track people as much as you can, under a EULA that gives you all the rights you can imagine" is a business model, Jay Edelson is necessary.
- picks_at_nits 12y agoA “tart” is a prostitute or sexually promiscuous woman. From this we get “tarted up," to adorn, dress, or decorate, especially in a flamboyant manner. “Tarted up” is nearly always used opprobriously. I find no factual basis for your claim that Mr. Altman made a homophobic remark. You are welcome to refile suit on the basis that he perpetuated sexist stereotypes via slut-shaming language.
- username223 12y ago> A “tart” is a prostitute or sexually promiscuous woman. Right. What do you think Sam meant when he called this man a "sexually promiscuous woman?"
- kbenson 12y agoWhen used in conjunction with leech and freedom fighter that doesn't even make sense. You have a particular interpretation of the term in your head, but that doesn't mean that's how it was intended to be taken.
- Semiapies 12y agoThe precise same thing as when the Bush administration was accused of "sexing up" its claims about Iraqi WMDs.
- picks_at_nits 12y agoTo respond with precision, “tarted up” doesn’t literally mean to be a tart, but to dress up like a tart. Thus it is that you can “tart up” even inanimate objects, e.g. “they’re really tarted this restaurant up."
- arfliw 12y ago>“Money doesn’t mean a ton,” Mr. Edelson said during an interview in the lobby of the Four Seasons hotel in San Francisco, wearing a watch whose face was loaded with diamond flecks. Well played.
- driverdan 12y agoIt doesn't mean he's being dishonest. If I was making 7-8 figures a year I'd own some expensive things too. It doesn't mean that money would be my primary driver though.
- anonymousab 12y ago>Asked to sum up the tech community’s feelings about Mr. Edelson, Sam Altman, president of Y Combinator, a technology incubator that invests in very young companies, said the lawyer was regarded as “a leech tarted up as a freedom fighter.” I guess that means even leeches have their societal uses.
- sukilot 12y agoMr Altman certainly has learned Mr Graham's knack for putting his foot in his mouth. There are better ways to disagree with someone who made a career of fighting for the public interest, even if he might threaten your investments in crapware bundlers or Craigslist spammers.
- thesteamboat 12y agoSomewhat offtopic but yes, leeches are in fact societally useful: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leeches#Medicinal_use_of_leeches https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leeches#Medicinal_use_of_leech...
- sukilot 12y agoPSA. This article is about Jay Edelson. You may also be interested to learn about Ben Edelman, who famously does similar sort of work.