FTC Proposes Barring Meta From Monetizing Kids' Data (cnbc.com) 11
The FTC is proposing to prevent Meta from monetizing children's data due to alleged violations of a 2020 privacy order. CNBC reports: According to the FTC, an independent assessor found "several gaps and weaknesses in Facebook's privacy program" that posed "substantial risks to the public." The company had agreed to independent assessments of its updated privacy program as part of the 2020 settlement, under which Facebook paid a $5 billion civil penalty following an FTC investigation around the Cambridge Analytica data scandal. The FTC alleges Facebook also violated an earlier 2012 order by continuing to allow app developers access to private user information. Facebook allowed third-party apps to access user data until mid-2020 in some cases, the FTC alleges. The FTC is also accusing Meta of violating the Children's Online Privacy Protection Rule by misrepresenting parental controls on its Messenger Kids app. The COPPA Rule requires parental consent for websites to collect personal information from kids under 13. The FTC alleged that while the company marketed that the app would only allow kids to talk with contacts their parents approved, children were able to communicate with additional contacts in group chats or group video calls in some circumstances.
As a result, the FTC is proposing to strengthen the terms of the 2020 agreement to put additional restrictions on the company, which would apply to all of Meta's services including Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Oculus. The proposed terms include a blanket ban on monetizing data from users under 18. That means any data collected from these users could only be used for security reasons and any data collected while users are under age could not be later monetized once they turn 18. The FTC also seeks to impose a pause on the company's ability to launch new or modified products or services until the independent assessor confirms in writing that Meta's privacy program is in full compliance with the terms of the agreement. Compliance with the 2020 order would also extend to any companies Meta acquires or merges with. The proposal would also require Meta to get affirmative consent from users for future use of facial recognition technology. Facebook spokesperson Andy Stone called the FTC's move a "political stunt." He said in a statement: "Despite three years of continual engagement with the FTC around our agreement, they provided no opportunity to discuss this new, totally unprecedented theory. We have spent vast resources building and implementing an industry-leading privacy program under the terms of our FTC agreement. We will vigorously fight this action and expect to prevail."
As a result, the FTC is proposing to strengthen the terms of the 2020 agreement to put additional restrictions on the company, which would apply to all of Meta's services including Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Oculus. The proposed terms include a blanket ban on monetizing data from users under 18. That means any data collected from these users could only be used for security reasons and any data collected while users are under age could not be later monetized once they turn 18. The FTC also seeks to impose a pause on the company's ability to launch new or modified products or services until the independent assessor confirms in writing that Meta's privacy program is in full compliance with the terms of the agreement. Compliance with the 2020 order would also extend to any companies Meta acquires or merges with. The proposal would also require Meta to get affirmative consent from users for future use of facial recognition technology. Facebook spokesperson Andy Stone called the FTC's move a "political stunt." He said in a statement: "Despite three years of continual engagement with the FTC around our agreement, they provided no opportunity to discuss this new, totally unprecedented theory. We have spent vast resources building and implementing an industry-leading privacy program under the terms of our FTC agreement. We will vigorously fight this action and expect to prevail."
Evolution of the Internet (Score:1)
Dear Meta (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Me to as a baby goat. Bah.
What is enfrocement going to be? (Score:4, Insightful)
They've apparently already repeatedly ignored agreements they made. Why would making a new agreement improve things. There needs to be enforcement, making the management responsible.
Re: (Score:2)
Move fast, break agreements
Just "monetizing"? (Score:4, Interesting)
Collecting the data of children and building profiles of them should be banned altogether. Imagine being a kid just reaching the age of majority - all of a sudden ALL the data that Facebook has collected on you is available to advertisers, and to whoever else has the coin to buy it. Having corporations and other bad actors in possession of a big chunk of your childhood means they can develop complete and deep psychological profiles - all the better to manipulate you very effectively, whether it's to buy their products or vote the way they want you to. Talk about stolen childhoods!
On second thought, just strike the first sentence I wrote and replace it with "collecting the data of people and building profiles of them should be banned altogether".
Zuck Meta, Zuck Facebook, and Zuck Fuckerberg.
Translation (Score:2)
So all repeat offenders need, is more rules? Good to know: Which congress-critters will be making that, part of their campaign?
Translation: Our smoke-screen claiming we weren't collecting data was ineffective, we need to become better criminals.
Fine them big enough o really hurt (Score:2)
Will nobody think of the billionaires? (Score:2)
It beggars belief that seemingly normal "Congress Critters" can dream up such humiliating abuses for these poor, abused billionaires? These preverts should be hung by the heels over a slow fire while the brands steam in liquid nitrogen (it sticks to the flesh better, for the joyful (for us) agony of being ripped out slowly, later).