Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Privacy United States Technology

Tech Industry Pursues a Federal Privacy Law, on Its Own Terms (nytimes.com) 49

An anonymous reader shares a report: In recent months, Facebook, Google, IBM, Microsoft and others have aggressively lobbied officials in the Trump administration and elsewhere to start outlining a federal privacy law, according to administration officials and the companies. The law would have a dual purpose, they said: It would overrule the California law and instead put into place a kinder set of rules that would give the companies wide leeway over how personal digital information was handled. "We are committed to being part of the process and a constructive part of the process," said Dean Garfield, president of a leading tech industry lobbying group, the Information Technology Industry Council, which is working on proposals for the federal law. "The best way is to work toward developing our own blueprint." The efforts could set up a big fight with consumer and privacy groups, especially as companies like Facebook face scrutiny for mishandling users' personal data. Many of the internet companies depend on the collection and analysis of such data to help them target the online ads that generate the bulk of their revenue.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Tech Industry Pursues a Federal Privacy Law, on Its Own Terms

Comments Filter:
  • So they want... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Bradmont ( 513167 ) on Monday August 27, 2018 @10:27AM (#57203236) Homepage
    A law that will explicitly permit them to abuse/ignore peoples' privacy? Great...
    • by Anonymous Coward

      Problem is, Faceboot's cyberstalking-based business model ought to be illegal under any reasonable legal system. Yet here they are, writing the laws.

      • by rtb61 ( 674572 )

        Well, don't you know, there massive invasions of privacy are aiding their massive invasions of privacy. They are lobbying aggressively, would that be like, "let us sell their secrets or we will make your fucking secrets public you fucker, don't like that, well here's fifty thousands campaign dollars to make it easier to swallow and it's you own fault, you sick fuck ,for having sex with under age prostitutes even if we supplied them.

        Isn't that how it works now?!?

    • These companies are no friends of Trump and him agreeing to this will just further upset the left. He should just tell Google and all to go to hell

    • Of course they do. "Profit above all else". Never forget we're just a 'product' to shitty companies like Zuckerbook and Google and Amazon and others. When it comes right down to it, they don't give a rats' ass about the privacy of individuals, they only care about conning you into giving away all your very-much-personal information and data to them for free, so they can turn around and sell that to whoever and however many people or other companies want to buy it. We've got an entire generation of people no
      • These companies need to be brought to heel, putting a gun to their corporate heads if necessary to force them to stop leeching peoples' data, and to delete anything and everything they have on someone at their request.

        I agree entirely. Unfortunately, the only way of making the bastards come to heel is to use literal, actual guns, and lots of them. But the government, (elected by the people, paid for by the corporations), has more guns, more force, more resources, and more cohesiveness than the citizenry ever will. Plus a huge part of the citizenry really has no clue, and adamantly refuses said clue when some kind soul tries to give it to them. So bend over, hold your ankles, and get used to this posture. Your neighbours,

        • by Rob Y. ( 110975 )

          Well, finally it is revealed. The founding fathers anticipated the rise of cybersnooping corporations and bestowed upon us the sacred second ammendment so we the people could go to actual, literal war against them. I guess the founding fathers also anticipated that a complacent and/or easily distracted public wouldn't use the other tool they gave them - i.e., the vote - to accomplish the same thing by peaceful means...

          • ... I guess the founding fathers also anticipated that a complacent and/or easily distracted public wouldn't use the other tool they gave them - i.e., the vote - to accomplish the same thing by peaceful means...

            I'm not sure that voting can actually do much any more, even if the majority of the electorate were to wake up and try to save itself. I suppose citizens could band together, choose independent candidates, and vote them in via a highly organized mass write-in campaign. But even in the highly unlikely event that this should happen, the newly-elected independents would have to agree on the main issues and problems, and work together to solve them. Lacking the organization, discipline, and resources of a polit

            • by Rob Y. ( 110975 )

              I always thought that Public Broadcasting could have been a vehicle to teach the public how to listen critically to of all sorts of messages (political and commercial) that seek to manipulate them. How to evaluate them for truthfullness - and to decipher the underlying behavior they're trying to influence.

              But of course the independence of Public Broadcasting didn't stand a chance against the messaging that it was a Liberal plot designed to destroy the country. And after much concerted effort, PBS and NPR

              • I've even heard Liberal commentators trying to make the argument that PBS is better off 'freed' from government funding, since it's now less subject to accusations of bias. Except that it's now biased toward the corporate overlords... Hmmm, am I making your point?

                I think you might be - so allow me to try to return the favour... ;-)

                During the last four or five decades, people have had loads of opportunities to vote in ways that count - not only at the ballot box, but with their feet, their wallets, their shopping choices, TV and movie choices, food choices, and on and on and on. They've pretty consistently opted out of anything that required effory, discomfort, or higher taxes - and they started doing that while the mass brainwashing we've been discussing was still i

      • "Of course they do. "Profit above all else"." Ahh, but, as the author of one of the previous loop-hole riddled privacy acts (Samuel Ervin) noted, the government (neither most congress-critters nor bureaubums nor oath-breaking jusges) does not like privacy, and it would be very difficult to write legislation that they could not and would not quickly nullify... or, as others realize, turn it inside out, by defining public info - including info about visa applicants and illegal alien invaders - to be private
    • by mikael ( 484 )

      You bet it. It's already happening that when I send off a resume as a direct application to another company by email, that "snatch squad" recruitment agencies get triggered and actively contact me to try and make me apply to industries I'm just not interested in and wish to avoid.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    guarding the hen house

    • Re:Foxes (Score:4, Interesting)

      by jenningsthecat ( 1525947 ) on Monday August 27, 2018 @11:19AM (#57203578)

      guarding the hen house

      Came here to say EXACTLY this. Perhaps the bigger problem though, is that the farmer is effectively in the employ of the foxes. The hens don't stand much of a chance in this scenario.

      I hope the EFF and the ACLU make lots of noise about this, and fight it tooth and nail.

  • by onyxruby ( 118189 ) <onyxruby@ c o m c a s t . net> on Monday August 27, 2018 @10:41AM (#57203328)

    A number of years back the computer industry tried pulling this stunt with UCITA. It provided a uniform license for software that in theory greatly simplified licensing.

    http://newsbreaks.infotoday.co... [infotoday.com]

    It sounded great in the soundbites the tech giants put out at the time. However, once you got into the details it quickly became apparent that the law that was completely tilted in their favor. For example it made it legal to remotely shut off users software in the event of a contract dispute.

    This is effectively UCITA 2.0 and must be opposed just as strongly as UCITA was. Don't allow the tech giants sell out your privacy rights. UCITA was defeated, this too can be defeated.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    I wonder if their long term goal is, to use NAFTA/CETA/TTIP to push this onto the EU too.

    (CETA, contrary to popular opinion is NOT dead, but was officially passed. With a few alterations that were more sneaky changes of wording than anything else, which got snuck back in right after. And "thanks" to NAFTA, that means TTIP passed though, since Canada can be used as a proxy.)

    • I wonder if their long term goal is, to use NAFTA/CETA/TTIP to push this onto the EU too.

      It will take a lot of time to push into the EU, but as a Brit I am concerned about how quickly this sort of thing will happen after Brexit.

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • so no more hippa and data can black list people in gop healthcare plans.

  • A solved problem? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by IWantMoreSpamPlease ( 571972 ) on Monday August 27, 2018 @11:23AM (#57203616) Homepage Journal

    >>It would overrule the California law...

    Well CA seems to already have a good law in place, all the feds need to do is say "CA law is now the federal model for law" and problem solved. ...for the citizens anyway. The corporations may not like it all too much however...

  • by bferrell ( 253291 ) on Monday August 27, 2018 @11:51AM (#57203808) Homepage Journal

    and the muck rakers were bringing monopoly after monopoly down, one realized they would not be able to stand against that onslaught. So they made a deal.

    They sold a tale of of noble, self sacrificing service for the public good in return for guaranteed return on investment and a legally sanctioned monopoly. To an extent, they even lived up to the story and they were wildly profitable.

    I give you The American Telephone &Telegraph Company.

    The consortium named in the article aren't offering as much as AT&T did... But the officials are far more corrupt than they were in that long ago time.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    ...said the wolf. Or, in this case, the pack o' wolves.

    Thankyouverymuch. This must be part of that "Just Fucking Trust Us" from Satya Nadella.

  • and has been for a long time, but it is getting worse.

    Well funded interests can influence the politicians to get what they want, in return politicians get (disguised) money or help with re-election (eg a few jobs created in their electoral area).

    Those able to put words in front of eyeballs can also do this: not just media magnates but those able to whip up passions -- this is easier in these Internet times (not just Google, Facebook et al but those who can create twitter, etc, storms). Sometimes these activists push for the right thing (eg Rosa Parks [wikipedia.org]), sometimes they are wacky (eg Wakefield on MMR [bmj.com]), others push the agenda of a small vocal group to the detriment of others. Fake news is one mechanism for achieving this.

    The make politicians & government act in the best interests of the population at large (not just elites & special interests) lobbying & fake news needs to be brought under control, ie regulated. However this is much easier said than done: politicians will resist their side deals; fake news peddlers will attack this. However unless we do so the ''common man'' will never get a fair deal.

  • See: https://news.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]
    The attitudes of companies like Facebook and Google and others with regard to our privacy rights is intimately tied into runaway capitalism. In a capitalistic economy where companies had good ethics, a moral compass, and a sense of partnering with citizens, they wouldn't dream of violating people's privacy and selling their private data and private lives to others the way that Facebook and Google do. Sadly we do not live in that world, but we must fight to make the wo

If all the world's economists were laid end to end, we wouldn't reach a conclusion. -- William Baumol

Working...