6 ms·

Can you better explain the difference please?

by dm2 11y ago

cjslep 11y ago
Amazon buying Newegg customer data from Newegg, vs Amazon buying Newegg and rerouting the Newegg website backend through its own network.
- dm2 11y ago
  I understand the two sides, but what's the difference to the consumer who has a Newegg account but does not want Amazon to have their personal data? In the end, Amazon would end up with the consumers data, so to the consumer there is no difference. Are you saying that there is a difference? That's what I wanted clarification on, what that difference was.
  - cjslep 11y ago
    To continue with the analogy above the difference arises if Newegg says "We don't share your data with third parties" and does #1. That would breach customer expectations because they are outright lying. The #2 case seems much less clear cut because Newegg wouldn't exist as a standalone entity anymore, and most people's reasonable expectation is Amazon would then have access to Newegg's data. It depends on each person's answer to the question: Is Amazon a third party in the second example?
    - dm2 11y ago
      You are assuming that a Privacy Policy is legally binding, it's generally accepted as not being. In the example, Amazon can do whatever it wants with the data. Data submitted to almost anyone online (maybe with the exception of large companies or companies specifically designed to not track data) should be considered public unfortunately. I have seen some states recently put in place laws to protect this data from being made public or sold carelessly, but for the most part it is unregulated as far as I can tell.
      - edwhitesell 11y ago
        While I agree that it's probably not legally binding (I beleive even the standard "Click and connect" contracts have been thrown out of courts in the past), do you have any references to share?
        dm2 11y ago
        I haven't looked for any precedent cases. TRUSTe was suppose to do something similar, but it's seal doesn't mean much anymore (not that it ever really did). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRUSTe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRUSTe Medical records, children's data, and sensitive financial data is protected under US law. US-EU Safe Harbor has some consumer data protection rules. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personally_identifiable_information#United_States_of_America http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personally_identifiable_informa... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_policy#Applicable_law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_policy#Applicable_law
      - Retra 11y ago
        In a discussion about policy, you should never use terms like "generally accepted" and "should be considered" to refer to the reality that is already under question. It's extremely confusing. The fact that your data isn't protected can't be used as an argument that it shouldn't be. Just because something is legal doesn't make it right, either.
      - cjslep 11y ago
        > You are assuming that a Privacy Policy is legally binding, it's generally accepted as not being. I'm not claiming privacy policies are legally binding, just that they can be an indicator of trustworthiness and integrity. That's what I really meant when I said "[Option #1] would breach customer expectations because they are outright lying." The way I read mc32's "I think there's a difference" is moral difference, because I share the same sentiment as him or her ("I hope the FTC wins its case...") which would turn that moral difference into a legally binding one.
- tomswartz07 11y ago
  I think it's more of the following: NewEgg selling customer data to Amazon, AND EBay, AND LinkedIn, AND Joe Schmoe's Tech Emporium. Each have their own data sharing policies. vs. NewEgg selling the entire business and assets to Amazon (and only Amazon). In this case, everything; hardware, product stock, servers, and data too.
- sre_ops 11y ago
  Nether cases are applicable. https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frbp https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frbp

Can you better explain the difference please?

by dm2 11y ago

Can you better explain the difference please?

Amazon buying Newegg customer data from Newegg, vs Amazon buying Newegg and rerouting the Newegg website backend through its own network.

dm2 11y ago
I understand the two sides, but what's the difference to the consumer who has a Newegg account but does not want Amazon to have their personal data? In the end, Amazon would end up with the consumers data, so to the consumer there is no difference. Are you saying that there is a difference? That's what I wanted clarification on, what that difference was.
- cjslep 11y ago
  To continue with the analogy above the difference arises if Newegg says "We don't share your data with third parties" and does #1. That would breach customer expectations because they are outright lying. The #2 case seems much less clear cut because Newegg wouldn't exist as a standalone entity anymore, and most people's reasonable expectation is Amazon would then have access to Newegg's data. It depends on each person's answer to the question: Is Amazon a third party in the second example?
  - dm2 11y ago
    You are assuming that a Privacy Policy is legally binding, it's generally accepted as not being. In the example, Amazon can do whatever it wants with the data. Data submitted to almost anyone online (maybe with the exception of large companies or companies specifically designed to not track data) should be considered public unfortunately. I have seen some states recently put in place laws to protect this data from being made public or sold carelessly, but for the most part it is unregulated as far as I can tell.
    - edwhitesell 11y ago
      While I agree that it's probably not legally binding (I beleive even the standard "Click and connect" contracts have been thrown out of courts in the past), do you have any references to share?
      - dm2 11y ago
        I haven't looked for any precedent cases. TRUSTe was suppose to do something similar, but it's seal doesn't mean much anymore (not that it ever really did). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRUSTe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRUSTe Medical records, children's data, and sensitive financial data is protected under US law. US-EU Safe Harbor has some consumer data protection rules. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personally_identifiable_information#United_States_of_America http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personally_identifiable_informa... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_policy#Applicable_law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_policy#Applicable_law
    - Retra 11y ago
      In a discussion about policy, you should never use terms like "generally accepted" and "should be considered" to refer to the reality that is already under question. It's extremely confusing. The fact that your data isn't protected can't be used as an argument that it shouldn't be. Just because something is legal doesn't make it right, either.
    - cjslep 11y ago
      > You are assuming that a Privacy Policy is legally binding, it's generally accepted as not being. I'm not claiming privacy policies are legally binding, just that they can be an indicator of trustworthiness and integrity. That's what I really meant when I said "[Option #1] would breach customer expectations because they are outright lying." The way I read mc32's "I think there's a difference" is moral difference, because I share the same sentiment as him or her ("I hope the FTC wins its case...") which would turn that moral difference into a legally binding one.
tomswartz07 11y ago
I think it's more of the following: NewEgg selling customer data to Amazon, AND EBay, AND LinkedIn, AND Joe Schmoe's Tech Emporium. Each have their own data sharing policies. vs. NewEgg selling the entire business and assets to Amazon (and only Amazon). In this case, everything; hardware, product stock, servers, and data too.
sre_ops 11y ago
Nether cases are applicable. https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frbp https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frbp