Ebay's Flexible Privacy Policy 349
l2718 writes "Ha'aretz has a disquieting report on a presentation made by eBay's senior counsel to law-enforcement officials. Apparently eBay logs all user interaction with them, and will happily hand over all the information to any law-enforcement official without a warrant -- a fax is quite sufficient. He is actually proud of their 'flexible' privacy policy."
How much.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:How much.. (Score:5, Funny)
Or *his* SlashDot Account [ebay.com] for that matter?
Text of Article (Score:5, Informative)
Sullivan was speaking to senior representatives of numerous law-enforcement agencies in the United States on the occasion of "Cyber Crime 2003," a conference that was held last week in Connecticut. His lecture was closed to reporters, and for good reason. Haaretz has obtained a recording of the lecture, in which Sullivan tells the audience that eBay is willing to hand over everything it knows about visitors to its Web site that might be of interest to an investigator. All they have to do is ask. "There's no need for a court order," Sullivan said, and related how the company has half a dozen investigators under contract, who scrutinize "suspicious users" and "suspicious behavior." The spirit of cooperation is a function of the patriotism that has surged in the wake of September 11.
eBay is the world's largest auction site. Some 62 million registered users buy and sell a variety of merchandise through the site, which charges commissions for every item sold. Sullivan claims that 150,000 Internet users earn their livelihood from the site, some having left their old jobs to become buyers or sellers on eBay.
The sales method on the site is simple: An individual registers as a user, types in his particulars, and affirms that he accepts the user conditions and the site's privacy policy. Whenever an item is sold, the buyer fills out an evaluation form, telling other users about the treatment he received, whether the merchandise was sent on time, etc. Other eBay users can then avoid buying from sellers who have received poor grades.
Sullivan says eBay has recorded and documented every iota of data that has come through the Web site since it first went online in 1995. Every time someone makes a bid, sells an item, writes about someone else, even when the company cancels a sale for whatever reason - it documents all of the pertinent information.
One would think that preserving privacy of the users, whose moves are so meticulously recorded, would be keenly observed at eBay, whose good name in the Internet community is one of its prime assets. But in the U.S. of the post 9/11 and pre-Gulf War II era, helping the "security forces" is considered a supreme act of patriotism.
Who needs a subpoena?
"We don't make you show a subpoena, except in exceptional cases," Sullivan told his listeners. "When someone uses our site and clicks on the `I Agree' button, it is as if he agrees to let us submit all of his data to the legal authorities. Which means that if you are a law-enforcement officer, all you have to do is send us a fax with a request for information, and ask about the person behind the seller's identity number, and we will provide you with his name, address, sales history and other details - all without having to produce a court order. We want law enforcement people to spend time on our site," he adds. He says he receives about 200 such requests a month, most of them unofficial requests in the form of an email or fax.
The meaning is clear. One fax to eBay from a lawman - police investigator, NSA, FBI or CIA employee, National Park ranger - and eBay sends back the user's full name, email address, home address, mailing address, home telephone number, name of company where seller is employed and user nickname. What's more, eBay will send the history of items he has browsed, feedbacks received, bids he has made, prices he has paid, and even messages sent in the site's various discussion groups.
Attorney Nimrod Kozlovski, author of "The Computer and the Legal Process" (in Hebrew), heard the lecture, and could not believe his ears. "The consent given in the user contract should be seen as `coerced consent,' in the absence of any opportunity to exercise free choice, with no real alternative but to agree. This is most certainly not conscious consent."
Kozlovski is part of the Information Society Project group at Yale Law School, in which he and his colleagues consider the effects of the new media on the structure of society. American law does not authorize searches of a person's home or body, he says, except in exceptional cases such as when the court authorizes a search, or when the individual gives his consent to a search.
"In the case before us, the Web site signs the user to a document that says it can do whatever it wants with his information. The eBay contract signed by the user concedes his or her rights to protection from the government; in essence, as soon as the contract is signed, eBay can invite the government to do whatever it wants with the information, he says.
A brief visit to the company's Web site reveals that the "user contract" that visitors are supposed to read before agreeing to the conditions is 4,023 words long. One paragraph makes reference to the site's "privacy policy." The user has to click on a link and is diverted to another document that is some 3,750 words long. It then takes another 2,390 words to reach the section about which Sullivan told the legal authorities: The user's privacy is solely up to eBay.
"The users are asked to read and agree to the site policy before they can make use of it," eBay spokesman Kevin Pursglove told Haaretz. "We provide a link to our privacy policy on every single page of our site, and provide summaries of this policy, all so that users will be familiar with our policy."
We will work for you
Nevertheless, eBay does not make do with simply sharing its data with the legal authorities. Sullivan says the company employs six investigators, all of whom have experience in police investigations. Their job is "to track down suspicious people and suspicious behavior." To that end, they scan for patterns that are atypical - different from "normal patterns." For example, if a person sold baseball tickets for two months and suddenly switches to selling a car, the eBay system will "wave a red flag" and signal the seller as someone behaving unusually. Who asks eBay to do it? No one. eBay volunteers.
eBay goes even further. In his lecture, Sullivan spoke about how he helped investigators locate a user who had been suspected of selling stolen cars through the site. "We tried to buy the car from the thief and in that way incriminate him. But the bad guy was smart. He saw there wasn't a single feedback in the history of the person who was making the purchase. He told us he didn't want to make a deal with us."
Sullivan explained that the incident taught the company a lesson, and that since then it has used pseudo buyers for which it constructs comprehensive simulated histories, including simulated feedbacks, all for the sake of incriminating those suspected of theft. "eBay is not willing to tolerate acts of fraud carried out on its site," explains Pursglove. "We believe that one of the ways to fight fraud is to cooperate with the legal authorities at the various levels.
Sullivan is even more forthcoming. Aware of how hard the police work, he decided to help as much as possible. "Tell us what you want to ask the bad guys. We'll send them a form, signed by us, and ask them your questions. We will send their answers directly to your e-mail." Essentially, by engaging in what seems like impersonation, eBay is exploiting its relationship with customers to pass on information to law enforcement authorities. Why? "We take various steps in order to fight fraud and provide a safe buying environment for our numerous users," says Pursglove.
"In order to prevent misuse of authority, the law ensures that authorized impersonation will only be used with persons suspected of carrying out illegal activity," says Pursglove. But eBay's practice is to impersonate people on a regular basis, for law-enforcement objectives. However, "there need not be a proven connection or well-founded suspicion of a crime having been performed," claims Kozlovski.
In July 2002, eBay bought PayPal, Inc. for $1.45 billion. PayPal, which offers the most popular means of payment on eBay, provides clearing services for the execution of online transactions. It enables Internet users to open accounts on the company site, transferring money from their credit card or bank account. When carrying out a transaction, the seller receives a certificate with which money can be withdrawn from the buyer's account in cash. The system obviates the need to reveal personal financial data.
When Paypal was acquired, the company reported 16 million users, as well as 3 million business accounts and 28,000 new visitors to the site each day. About 60 percent of PayPal's income derives from commissions received from users buying goods on eBay. About 70 percent of eBay buyers use PayPal.
Two years earlier, eBay bought Half.com, a site that specializes in sales of CDs and books. Sullivan explained that these acquisitions help eBay to provide lawmen with a full picture. "Every book or CD comes with a bar code. So we know who bought what. The acquisition of PayPal helps us to locate people more precisely. In the old days, we had to trace IP addresses (unique address given to computers linked to the Internet), to locate the buyer, but now Paypal supplies us with the money trail.
PayPal has about 20 million customers, which means that we have 20 millions files on its users," Sullivan proudly relates. "If you contact me, I will hook you up with the Paypal people. They will help you get the information you're looking for," he tells his listeners. "In order to give you details about credit card transactions, I have to see a court order. I suggest that you get one, if that's what you're looking for." It isn't certain that visitors to the site are aware of the thick hints eBay gives the lawmen.
"By buying PayPal, eBay is merging the information about the goods trail with the money trail," explains Kozlovski. "Thus, in spite of the protective mechanisms of the law against disclosure of details on transactions, eBay is in a position to analyze the full set of data and `advise' investigators when it might be `worthwhile' for them to ask for a subpoena to disclose the details of a financial transaction. Essentially, this bypasses the rules on non-disclosure of details of financial transactions and the confidentiality of the banker-client relationship."
Kozlovski mentions how special investigator Kenneth Starr issued a court order that ordered the bookstore where Monica Lewinsky bought her books to report to him the names of the books she bought. "Then, there was a huge fuss. Now you don't need a special order - eBay does the work for the investigators."
Kozlovski feels that eBay's practice should be seen as part of a worrisome trend in the West to curtail protection of individual rights. In communist regimes, he says, the state would assign watchers to follow every citizen, who would pass incriminating information on to the authorities. Now the state doesn't have to do a thing. People come to it of their own free will. This is also the case for eBay, which exploits its stature in the market to have users accept contracts that strip them of their privacy. Perhaps the regime is different, but the outcome is most assuredly the same.
A million new items a day
eBay has no operations in Israel. But in the U.S., Europe and even the Far East, the name eBay is uttered in the same breath with names like Yahoo, Google and Amazon. The company created an electronic business arena where sellers offer their wares and buyers purchase them. eBay's trick is that both the sellers and the buyers are ordinary citizens. On eBay, you can find people selling used chewing gum (and there are buyers), torn soccer balls, 18th century forks, sunflower seeds and luxury cars (in 2002 alone, some 3,000 cars were sold on the site, at a total of $30 million.)
eBay is one of the few Internet companies that shows huge profits quarter after quarter. The company completed the fourth quarter of 2002 with revenues of $414 million and net profits of $87 million. The company had overall income in 2002 of $1.2 billion, and net profits of $250 million. It is traded on Nasdaq at a company value of $23.4 billion - three times that of Amazon, twice that of Yahoo and eight times that of the Israeli security behemoth, Checkpoint.
At any given moment, eBay is conducting some 12 million auctions, divided into about 18,000 different categories. About two million new items are offered for sale every day, and 62 million registered users scour the site to find them. These users have given eBay the monopoly on online auctions in America. Companies such as Yahoo and Amazon tried to get into the auction market, but were forced to give up. An estimated 150,000 people earn their livelihoods solely from buying and selling items by Internet. The company maintains local sites in Britain, Germany, Italy, South Korea, Ireland, Australia, Spain, Singapore and Sweden.
eBay is a monster that churns out money 24 hours a day, 365 days a year - for itself and for its millions of users.
What this is REALLY about (Score:5, Interesting)
Specifically, states are busy passing laws allowing collection of taxes on internet sales, but most of these sales go unreported. (Think about it, did you list last year's eBay sales on your 1040? Well, neither did anyone else.) So this is their method for reporting. And thanks to eBay's "flexible" reporting system, a simple fax request is all that's needed. No need for a time-consuming, cumbersome warrant with all those messy rules about Judge's signatures and prior evidence... just a bored cop's desire to go trolling for evil tax evaders.
"Dear eBay,
Please send us a list of all the transactions in the past 7 years from customers in the 90210 area code.
Thank you,
Sgt. Jackass, Podunk California Police Department."
It's simple. If they want to collect taxes on unreported sales, they start with records from the largest online retailer, the one who hands out information no questions asked. Thanks for nothing, eBay!
Let's see (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe you need letterhead.
Oh, I've got an Internet connection, and plenty of places have seals and official logos online. The quality isn't great, but hey - it's a fax, right?
Maybe you need a phone number.
Oh, I've gota phone I can sit by and pretend to be whoever I want when I answer it.
What was it Kevin Mitnick said about social engineering?
Re:Let's see (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Let's see (Score:2, Insightful)
I work in Student Records at a technical college in MN. I will NOT allow anyone to request information over the phone. They must either MAIL or FAX me a request with a hand written signature in order for me to release this information to them (a picture ID in person will be acceptable as well but due to my secure location in the building it is more difficult to reach me that way).
State and Federal law states that people can request information over the phone if it is going directly to them and *I* feel that it is really that person. Problem here is that I cannot verify if it is really them and the social engineering thing comes into play. So basically I won't accept any phone requests. I feel that I cannot safely determine who the person is if I don't see a handwritten request.
FERPA and State Laws will protect the information bearer in the case that information is given to an individual that should not have it. Would I want to be responsible if someone's life is ruined (identity theft, murder, among others) b/c I was neglegent and said "oh the laws will protect me"?
I know that other people in the world have no problems giving out this information. I suggest that if you are a person that is nervous have them add to your account a "DO NOT RELEASE INFORMATION" tag.
While the DNR can be haunting if you lose everything due to fire, flood, etc, it is your safest way of protecting yourself. w/o a court order you cannot release information so a Fax would not do.
That's my
A *handwritten signature*? (Score:5, Insightful)
I work in Student Records at a technical college in MN. I will NOT allow anyone to request information over the phone. They must either MAIL or FAX me a request with a hand written signature in order for me to release this information to them...
State and Federal law states that people can request information over the phone if it is going directly to them and *I* feel that it is really that person. Problem here is that I cannot verify if it is really them and the social engineering thing comes into play. So basically I won't accept any phone requests. I feel that I cannot safely determine who the person is if I don't see a handwritten request.
Oh, for chrissakes - handwritten requests are completely and utterly useless. Let me guess, it has to be on letterhead? See parent post regarding availability thereof...
So I fax you a request. It has Police Department letterhead...or something similar. I mean, you don't know what the Jackass Police Department's letterhead looks like. And I sign it as the chief of Jackass Police Department. You don't know what his signature looks like either. And I put my phone number on it - but it has the same area code and extension as the main number, so it could be a non-main phone line. Or maybe I made up a police department that doesn't even exist.
How many E-bay knobs are going to fully check this? Are they going to get a directory assistance to find the PD and check the number? Are they going to talk to the chief, from the phone number they looked up, to make sure he ordered the data? What if they can't find the department's listing (could be a small department, could be I made it up)? Probably none of the above.
When you get down to it, faxed requests are pretty much worthless. Which is why I would want a warrant served by law enforcement personnel who I could easily check up on. As for DNR, I don't believe that helps with ebay.
Jackass PD? (Score:3, Funny)
I'm gonna go out on a limb, here...
I would guess that most people (yes, EVEN student records workers) would question even a formal letter from Jackass PD.
Re:Jackass PD? (Score:3, Interesting)
Suppose you screw me in an auction. I fax in a request for your info, find out where you live, where you work etc.
Now I don't have to settle for just marking you as a bad seller/buyer, I can give personal punishment.
Re:Jackass PD? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Let's see (Score:3, Funny)
I don't like butterscotch, but I do like vanilla. You don't see friggin holy wars over pudding, though, do you?
Hmm, no, I don't remember him saying that.
Re:Let's see (Score:3, Informative)
Hmm, no, I don't remember him saying that.
What? You mean you haven't heard of the famous "Saralee" speach?
Oh man. You missed a good one. Some other choice quotes:
It could be worse ... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:It could be worse ... (Score:3, Funny)
Or I can just trade them those 5 million CC #'s...
did I just write that?
*cough*
Pick the right target (Score:5, Insightful)
Amen. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Pick the right target (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Pick the right target (Score:2, Insightful)
More laws is not the answer. Simpler laws would result in better enforcement and thus better protection.
Re:Pick the right target (Score:3, Interesting)
As if "more laws" was a viable solution to anything.
Well yeah, it does solve certain problems. In this case, we are just catching up with our European brethren. Privacy is about more than just protecting yourself from police on fishing expeditions (although that in itself is valuable). It's also about making identity theft harder to commit. There's also the bonus that you won't have as many people trading your info and bombarding you with ads. I get at least 5 solicitations a week to refinance my FHA mortgage, which I don't have anymore, and I get lots and lots of credit card comeons.
Do you realize just how few of our laws are obeyed anyway?
We mostly obey the ones that make sense - robbery, murder, and arson are fairly rare. The ones we tend not to obey are frequently archaic (the one about requiring a flagman to walk in front of any car driven by a woman) and some are simply unreasonable (most speed limits are a bit low, especially on the highway. Some troopers have even complained about this).
Should not Need laws (Score:2)
Yes in today's society it does, but its sad.
Re:There is no Constitutional right to privacy (Score:5, Interesting)
There is actually no Constitutional right to privacy.
There is in California [ca.gov]...Re:There is no Constitutional right to privacy (Score:4, Interesting)
The Roe v Wade case pretty much estabished the right to privacy, as that was one of the main points used to win the case.
Re:There is no Constitutional right to privacy (Score:3, Insightful)
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
And, just in case you do not think gathering evidence applies there, let me throw this one at you:
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
In other words, just because the Constitution does not say you have the right to privacy does not mean you are denied such a right. It only means that the founding fathers did not foresee the requirement to say, "You have the right to privacy."
Re:Pick the right target (Score:2)
But the laws do protect our privacy. It's just that the power-mad Republican jingoes will do anything to bypass the Fourth Amendment, and will allow corporations to do so as well.
Is anyone truly surprised? (Score:5, Insightful)
That would be illegal in the EU (Score:5, Interesting)
It appears they have a presence in the UK. Therefore the Data Protection Act applies to them. They make no mention of this in their Privacy Policy:
http://pages.ebay.co.uk/help/community/png-priv
Oh, dear. Looks like someone should shop them to the Data Protection Registrar...
Re:That would be illegal in the EU (Score:5, Informative)
Still illegal under EU privacy law (Score:3, Informative)
Re:That would be illegal in the EU (Score:3)
Is this legal ? They should check. (Score:4, Interesting)
Else this would have been YEARS that every EU firm would have put their Data server in some off shore haven.
IAAL - it contravenes UK law. (Score:2, Informative)
Where you store the data is irrelevant. The Data Protection Act 1998 regulates the acquisition transmission and processing of data. It prevent you from transferring such data out of the jurisdiction without safeguards.
If Dabs or eBay serve web pages in the UK/EU (even if they do it from servers in the US) and gather personal data from that web page that activity is governed by the DPA since user interaction takes place with the UK/EU. Some other actions on the data (e.g. automated decision making & processing) may be lawful if they occur outside the EU but the gathering and transmission of the data to the US falls with UK law. Also eBay has a
see privacy [ukitlaw.com]
That's great, as long as e-bayers are aware of it (Score:5, Interesting)
as long as it was printed on the site when I registered, or sent to me in an e-mail update.
Now, the legality of defining their policy and having you click-thru is still up in the air with EULAs; just because its printed in legalese doesn't mean it will hold up in court.
But to give me a warm fuzzy, disclose it to me.
Why? Because there are a lot of rip-off artists on e-bay. If it makes it easier for law enforcement to find and fine these scummy ebayers, that is a GOOD THING.
Honestly, I'd rather have E-bay in my corner if I get screwed than to have them go the PayPal route.
Point of Clarification: PayPal (Score:4, Informative)
However what I'm referring to is problems where people paid through paypal, never got an item in return, and paypal said "sucks to be you. What do you want me to do about it?!"
Here is a link to Paypal's class action suits... [aboutpaypal.org] read the front page story.
Re:That's great, as long as e-bayers are aware of (Score:3, Informative)
Re:rip off artists (Score:3, Informative)
Know what else? (Score:5, Informative)
Bid histories for each auction, items you've bidded on, auctions you've won... Yep.. It's all there.
I've been spammed to death because of eBay (luckily I use a hotmail address with them). I bought a couple of old SNES games, next thing you know 100 yahoos are offering me CD's full of ROM images for 20 bucks or so.
Tracing your email address to the actual person is a small hoop to jump through.
Any real privacy on eBay is a figment of your imagination. It's like expecting your trip to the mall to be 'private'.
this isn't what people care about (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:this isn't what people care about (Score:2, Interesting)
If you ever bought something from me, I have you home address and full name.
If you do some research on identity theft, that and a little leg work is all that's needed to know everything about you, take all your money, and ruin your credit rating until the end of time.
Especially when banks have 'security' questions like "Mothers maiden name".
BTW, this is the way it's always been on eBay, and has absolutely nothing to do with homeland security.
Why would you think participating in a public auction should provide privacy?
Re:stratjakt is a social engineer, I doubt it (Score:2)
No problem is impossible. Through enough resources at it, and it goes away. Just a matter of attaining those resources, such as time, or money, or people.
Given your name and home address, I'm sure anyone can find your other personal information and can get a credit card with
RTFA (Score:2)
And I quote the article (which I actually read)...
What's more, eBay will send the history of items he has browsed
I would like to see you scrape that.
Only on Slashdot would someone who obviously had not read the f***ing article get mo... Oh, never mind...
Re:Know what else? (Score:2)
This is special. Let's see how many bogus fax requests ebay gets this weekend.
don't complain (Score:4, Funny)
Belgian diamonds anyone?
Sure... read the fine print (Score:3, Funny)
Now, it may irk Ebay's USERS...
Of course, this could be open to abuse... Say you want your Ex-girlfriend's information... forge a law-enforcement agency letterhead, and fax the request from your local Kinkos (I wonder if they require a direct phone contact before they give up the goods... though that would also be easy to fake).
Hmmm... caveat emptor
Other sites not much different (Score:3, Insightful)
Yup, when that happens, a lot of police are going to head over to Anne Nonymouse's place in Beverly Hills 90210. I think she's ordering a lot of child porn.
Don't impersonate... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Don't impersonate... (Score:2)
If you agree to the terms (Score:3, Insightful)
Admire that string of X's in the "Legal Requests" column.
If you have ever been ripped off on ebay... (Score:5, Interesting)
If you have ever been ripped off or defrauded on ebay, you would look at this from a different perspective.
The last thing I want to do when someone defrauds me using ebay is jump through the many legal hoops to obtain a warrant.
As stated, this information can only be requested by law enforcement, and trust me, law enforcement officials don't get off of from violating your privacy and requesting it just for kicks. This is a welcome move that will help people that got screwed recover their money a little easier and a little faster. I, and many other ebayers, welcome the policy.
Witold
www.witold.org
Re:If you have ever been ripped off on ebay... (Score:2)
Yeah, that whole due-process, checks-and-balances thing is awfully inconvenient. The only reason the law even makes people jump through those hoops to get a warrant for someone's arrest is to inconvenience you personally.
Re:If you have ever been ripped off on ebay... (Score:2)
No, they get off of beating the crap out of student protesters.
Well known fact.
Re:If you have ever been ripped off on ebay... (Score:2)
Wait until you piss someone off. they make one phone call, and your under investigation. So now your life is under scrutiny, you get a mark on your record, and next time you even near any fraud(like bidding on an item that turns out to be fraudulant even if you didn't know), you'll be investigated again.
If you take proper precautions, you odds of getting screwed go down dramatically.
The way things are now, even if the catch the guy who screwed you,in all likley hood, you still won't get anything back.
Historically, The 'police' have always gotten out of hand when no checks and blances are in place.
Lets say you have complete confidence in the people who work 'for' the government. lets also say every member of the government will protect your rights out of principle. What about the next person in that position? or the one after that?
Law enforcement violations (Score:2, Informative)
How about the Top 10 List of Police Database Abuses [techtv.com]?
Cheers, Joel
Re:If you have ever been ripped off on ebay... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:If you have ever been ripped off on ebay... (Score:3, Interesting)
On the one hand, I do see that the fraudulent person should be revealed under the right circumstances. On the other hand, the process of obtaining a warrant or other confirmation data is the process of determining if you are in the right circumstances or not. For example, another poster pointed out how easy it would be to defraud this system into revealing personal information to non-police personnel. A used record company might be able to decipher a competitor's next business moves by illegally obtaining their e-bay browsing habits. Or a political incumbent might get "dirt" on an opponent by requesting their viewing habits. Warrants are there to prevent such abuses... if police and those claiming to be police never abused the system, there would be no need for warrants at all.
To obtain a warrant, you go before a judge and ask her if the search is reasonable. That's not a tremendous hoop to jump through to resolve a complaint.
Unlawful Surveillance (Score:3, Informative)
I can find (User Agreement):
6.3 License. Solely to enable eBay to use the information you supply us with, so that we are not violating any rights you might have in that information, you agree to grant us a non-exclusive, worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, sublicensable (through multiple tiers) right to exercise the copyright, publicity, and database rights (but no other rights) you have in Your Information, in any media now known or not currently known, with respect to Your Information. eBay will only use Your Information in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
The good stuff is here [ebay.com].
This is a cost cutting measure, pure and simple (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if they were, any information garnered in this way would immediately be thrown out of court in most countries (including the US) as inadmissible, because the source would be deemed an illegal search if the proper warrants hadn't been obtained.
Without even examining the link it's obvious why eBay would do this - verifying the legality and scope of every warrant that it is presented with takes time, and time costs money. Rather than spend this time and money unproductively (cooperating with police officers doesn't produce revenues), they choose the path of least resistance.
Unfortunately, eBay is sufficiently large enough (or at least it thinks it is) that it doesn't see this as a reason for people to defect to less popular rival online auction sites.
Re:This is a cost cutting measure, pure and simple (Score:2)
Re:This is a cost cutting measure, pure and simple (Score:2)
Re:This is a cost cutting measure, pure and simple (Score:2)
BZZZ! Sorry, you're totally wrong. But thanks for playing "I'm a constitutional lawyer!"
The 'search' was consenual, so no warrant was needed. If they went onto YOUR computer, and took the data w/o a warrant, then it'd be inadmissable. But in this case, the data was on eBay's computer, and they were hapyp to part with it.
Let the Market Decide (Score:3, Insightful)
If a competing auction site were to be setup with greater privacy, and was successful, more power to it. As long as eBay fully discloses its policies, then there shouldn't be any whining about it -- folks are free to vote with their mouse, and click on another auction site
Personally, I think it's positive that eBay will cooperate with bona fide investigations, and not force them to jump through hoops (at taxpayer expense!) to get the data they need to do their job.
It's not as though medical records are being stored on eBay -- just one's bids on beanie babies, or other baubles.
Re:Let the Market Decide (Score:3, Insightful)
PayPal (Score:5, Insightful)
I hear some people use it like a bank. Would you want your financial info tossed around like that?
One more reason so stay way from Paypal.
Ebay does. (Score:2)
It depends- if you have a secondary account attached to it, its no big deal.
I clearly violate people's rights, too (Score:3, Insightful)
If I placed an ad in the paper selling something (say, a large supply of ammonium nitrate fertilizer), and the police came up to me and asked me about what people came and inquired about it, I would tell them without hesitation. Big deal.
Guess what? There is no right to anonymity. And law enforcement has to have SOME room to work. Too many people seem to think that law enforcement should be required to never ask questions and never access the public.
Re:I clearly violate people's rights, too (Score:2)
I think your attitude will change when you know someone who has been wrongfully targetted, harassed, questioned and then detained by the police for a robbery, even though he had a solid alibi for the time that they never even bothered to follow up on...
Re:I clearly violate people's rights, too (Score:2)
not me. get a court order, then no problem.
Next time they ask you a question, no matter how personal, you had better answer,because if you don't they'll consider that a change in behaviour and you will be a suspect. I also won't let one in my house without a warrant.
It is not about protecting criminals, it is about have a free country.
Re:I clearly violate people's rights, too (Score:3, Informative)
Three cheers! One of the *first* things to remember when the police come knocking is you do not have to answer any of their questions. Don't do it! You never know when a seemingly minor bit of information will damage you or a friend.
Knowing your rights, and following the letter of the law in regards to them, is crucial to maintaining a free society. It keeps everyone honest, keeps you free.
A few links for the google impaired:Remember, the police have plenty of ways to legally get information from you if they need it for an investigation. If they need your help, they get it through the proper channels.
Anonymity is an important right... (Score:3, Insightful)
" A popular response is: "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
"By that reasoning, of course, we shouldn't mind if the police were free to come into our homes at any time just to look around, if all our telephone conversations were monitored, if all our mail were read, if all the protections developed over centuries were swept away. It's only a difference of degree from the intrusions already being implemented or considered.
"The truth is that we all do have something to hide, not because it's criminal or even shameful, but simply because it's private. We carefully calibrate what we reveal about ourselves to others. Most of us are only willing to have a few things known about us by a stranger, more by an acquaintance, and the most by a very close friend or a romantic partner. The right not to be known against our will -- indeed, the right to be anonymous except when we choose to identify ourselves -- is at the very core of human dignity, autonomy and freedom.
If we allow the state to sweep away the normal walls of privacy that protect the details of our lives, we will consign ourselves psychologically to living in a fishbowl. Even if we suffered no other specific harm as a result, that alone would profoundly change how we feel. Anyone who has lived in a totalitarian society can attest that what often felt most oppressive was precisely the lack of privacy.
Bad term: flexible (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not just eBay... (Score:5, Interesting)
Columbus, OH exists. (on topic in context) (Score:2, Informative)
Columbus is Ohio's Capital City.
Capitals Map [50states.com]
Re:Columbus, OH exists. (on topic in context) (Score:2)
Ob-OT-Trivia: Columbus, OH is also the setting for the 1980's US TV sitcom "Family Ties".
How do I delete my ebay account? (Score:4, Interesting)
I do not ever intend to use ebay, but it seems my account will forever be there.
Annoying that.
Re:How do I delete my ebay account? (Score:3, Funny)
As an added bonus, for quick termination, send an anonymous e-mail to eBay mentioning the item. Then time how long it takes until you can't access your account any longer.
think about this (Score:3, Insightful)
I think some people would have different opinions on this privacy issue, although I agree when it comes to the scam artists a heightened police interventention level would be welcome.
This is scary! (Score:2, Interesting)
Ebay owns PayPal! That means PayPal is included in this! Its the same as a poilceman going to your bank & asking for your complete financial details... Do you want this too???
This has nothing to do with terrorism! The 9/11 terrorists had plastic knives any other low-tech means...
Kind of scary... (Score:4, Informative)
As an Ebay user, 200 request a month for personal information seems high to me.
I could have a buddy that works at the police department. If I visit him frequently, nobody would see a problem with me saying he is expecting me and I will just wait in his office. While he is at lunch, I could use his fax machine and request the information of anybody I want.
You Agreed to this.. (Score:3, Informative)
Thanks for your attention.
You were warned... (Score:4, Insightful)
Inalienable rights Re:You were warned... (Score:3, Informative)
No matter how hard you try, you cannot legally sell yourself into slavery, because freedom is inalienable. Any such contract is illegal and void.
I would claim that this kind of privacy is equally inalienable.
Otherwise, we end up with a police state by proxy.
I can only hope that this proves to be true in court. There's nothing that can stop eBay from reporting what they think is a crime to police (in fact, I think that's fine). However, that's very different from having the police request that they release your private information.
Maybe that seems like a narrow legalistic distinction to some, but it's a very important one.
Yawn. (Score:4, Funny)
For example, the guy that sniped me a couple weeks ago, on a nice 24V, 6A power supply. I looked in his history, and saw that he'd recently bought some, ermmm, enhancement products [cmdrtaco.net]. It's the little things (heh heh) like this that take the pain out of losing an auction.
This simply saves time (Score:3, Informative)
Prior to that, a phone call is all that is necessary to a service provider to legally obligate them to preserve whatever records they already have for the given subject. This power comes from 18 USC 2703 (f) and is known as an "Order to Preserve." It does not require the service provider to start collecting new information, or collect more than they previously were, just to preserve what they already have. That gives law enforcement time to draft the court order and get it signed.
Legal counsel at service providers know these issues very well. eBay is apparently choosing to make life easier on the legal end of things by offering a certain level of cooperation. Notice it did say they would require a warrant in certain situations, so it's not 100%.
Thats the price you pay. (Score:2)
Once you decide to participate in commerce within any community, you should have a lower expectation of privacy than if you didn't participate, as long as the lower privacy is directly relative to protecting the integrity of the community. You can't compare this to the privacy you expect from your ISP, just releasing your browsing habits to the feds with a simple request.
As a seller: You are knowingly trading a small amount of privacy in exchange for a less fraudulent environment to trade in. You must provide a credit card for verification and for billing. In the real world, you still have to go downtown and give proof of who you are to get a business license. The police can legally watch who goes in and out of your business, without a warrant, just as they get info from ebay about transactions.
As a buyer, you still have to provide certain information in order to complete a purchase. This is true in any enviroment where you are not standing there, with currency in hand. Even then, any police officer can legally WATCH you make this transaction within plain view.
This bring online and offline into parity, thats all. Bringing public transactions (the auctions) within plane view. Personally, I have no problem with ebay releasing information to the feds to assist with investigations, with proper notification to me via the privacy policy.
Since I am asking people all over the globe to give me money, it should be my DUTY to do so in a very open manner, not being able to "hide" just because I am using a computer network to do my selling. It is this transparency that makes capitolism work fairly for everyone.
IANAL, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
From the article:
Attorney Nimrod Kozlovski, author of "The Computer and the Legal Process" (in Hebrew), heard the lecture, and could not believe his ears. "The consent given in the user contract should be seen as `coerced consent,' in the absence of any opportunity to exercise free choice, with no real alternative but to agree. This is most certainly not conscious consent."
I think this says it all. We are rapidly becoming a society in which corporations can strip individuals of their liberties not by virtue of law, but by using onerous contracts.
Imagine if the utility companies forced a person to hand over keys to their residence when they signed up for service, so that the company could "inspect the premises in the interests of public safety". It wouldn't be long before the utility company would realize that they can make additional income by "renting" your key to law enforcement agencies on demand. But you, the resident would effectively have no say in this - you either agree to their terms, or you do without gas/electric/phone service.
You see, the danger of this is that by "renting" the key, law enforcement no longer needs a warrant to search your house; you implicitly gave consent for entry to the utility company, who then resold that consent to law enforcement. It is these kinds of agreements which allow law enforcement to circumvent the checks and balances gauranteed by the constitution, and this is what makes them so dangerous.
How long will it be before our lives and liberties are entirely beholden to corporate interests?
Long live Privacy! Privacy is dead! (Score:4, Insightful)
Imagine being able to search:
Every page you've ever been to.
What you have searched for on Google.
Everything you have looked at, purchased, or sold on eBay.
All financial information from Paypal.
All the people you've sent/recieved email to/from.
I'm sure I'm missing a few things - but who needs TIA when these companies are bending over backwards to provide all this info?
Poindexter probably figured this out and got a raise for saving so much money... :(
Now what? (Score:2, Insightful)
I used to live under a communist regime, and I think now I much prefer neighbors invading my privacy to get some extra food stamps to feed their children than a huge compnay like eBay appeasing the government a bit too much to get favorable regulation with which to make even more money.
Yes, I know I can just avoid eBay--and I do, so it's not really a great comparison. It just bothers me when people think that capitalism is the panacea for the world's ills and like to point out where it fails.
We're paying for eBay's security, then? (Score:3, Interesting)
Hello? Sure reads like the entire eBay model has potential holes that the service is unable to address. As a remedy they'll put this "you fax, we tell" band-aid on, courtesy of the taxpayer -- we do pay for cops' salaries, right?
Somewhere there's an internal memo that says "We can't afford to do anything about all this abuse, so our choice is really to let the cops clean up afterwards at their expense." Maybe this Joseph Sullivan has it in a locked drawer in the "Law Enforcement and Compliance" department vault. I'd kinda like to see that one.
I'm with the people objecting: the bar oughta be set higher than this, and the situation has to be clear to people on the site. That's at the very least. And we should be asking the same questions about this site that anyone would about a bar where criminal activity is out of hand.
Ebay Alternatives? (Score:2, Interesting)
E-Bay, Half.com and the DOD's DB Cruncher... (Score:5, Insightful)
# welcome to black helicopter shell.
# enter delusional paranoid prophesy at prompt.
#Given that E-Bay will happily fax over their database records for a given user, one must also wonder if their entire database might be consumed by the DOD's efforts to correlate database information and a threat of terrorism.
Remember that E-bay also owns half.com. That means their DB also includes every hlaf transaction one might have made or even inquired about the possibility of.
Let's say that once, just for fun, you checked to see if something nefarious like "The Anarachist's Cookbook" was available for purchase through half. Bingo, you are a national security threat -- you might be wanting to blow something up. Or something. You didn't necessarily buy the book, you were just curious, Mr. Now-A-Threat-To-The-Free-World.
Now, under the Patriot Act, all sorts of nasty things might happen to you. All for looking for a book.
Yes, I know it sounds paranoid. But when you add up all of the reports lately, it's really easy to see dominos lined up just waiting for something to push one over. When it goes, likely all the others will obediently fall.
Who wants to bet (Score:4, Funny)
Language abuse (Score:3, Interesting)
I see patriotism as the willingness to protect our rights and freedoms, while this smacks of blind nationalism. They're promoting the same spin on this that Microsoft uses with respect to 'secure computing.'- it means what you think it means, but only if you're on the other side of the fence.
While this can be a powerful tool . . . (Score:3, Insightful)
However, I really don't like the idea of the authorities being able to make casual inquiries via fax. At the very least, issue a subpoena in which you state a legitimate law enforcement purpose for the inquiry. For this, you only have to get the approval of your police legal advisor or a prosecutor.
The way this looks right now, cops can "browse" through anyone they want to check on, just to see if they can find anything suspicious. While this is certainly not the behavior most of us would engage in, there are always those willing to abuse this kind of device.
Those with a legitimate purpose can easily obtain the information with just a little bit of extra effort, whereas those who are just casually cruising through users (say, randomly checking any high-volume ebayers) may be discouraged by having to articulate a legitimate law enforcement purpose for each case.
As to self-policing on the part of ebay, I have absolutely no problem with that. Just like the Pawn shop owner who sees someone coming in with car stereos all the time, ebay has an ethical duty (in my opinion, with which you may disagree) to report people they believe may be engaging in criminal activity.
But if Google does it, it's cool? (Score:4, Interesting)
"Google currently does not allow outsiders to gain access to raw data because of privacy concerns. Searches are logged by time of day, originating I.P. address (information that can be used to link searches to a specific computer), and the sites on which the user clicked. People tell things to search engines that they would never talk about publicly -- Viagra, pregnancy scares, fraud, face lifts. What is interesting in the aggregate can seem an invasion of privacy if narrowed to an individual.
"So, does Google ever get subpoenas for its information? 'Google does not comment on the details of legal matters involving Google,' Mr. Brin responded."
Who to Contact If You've Been Ripped Off (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.usps.com/postalinspectors/fraud/MailFr
https://www.ifccfbi.gov/cf1.asp [ifccfbi.gov]: The FBI's Fraud Complaint Form. The FBI seems a lot less active in prosecuting small cases than USPS, but i get the impression that if they get a LOT of complaints from people on the same company, they start to look in on it. Worth a try.
Remember: Every time you let someone rip you off without calling them on it, it makes it that much easier for them to rip off other people down the line.
Re:It's a changed world (Score:3, Funny)
Re:That's the price of doing business... (Score:2, Insightful)
That is why as a BUYER you should know what you are looking for and ask question of the SELLER. people have to use commen sense to avoid being ripped off there will always be scammers out there.
I know of several people that have been seriously ripped, and in a way, I'm glad that Ebay will pass out a scammers info.. esp. to the police.
If it was just the scammers info that would be fine BUT IT IS EVERYONE'S INFO that i'm not glad about it is extremly easy to fake LE request via Fax or Email and any Larry moe or curly could potentially get the information with requiring a court order it raises the bar before they give out the info.
Re:That's the price of doing business... (Score:2)
Honda's with fake performance parts and upgrades? No way. That coffee can doesn't really add 15 HP? Stickers don't make me go faster? That wing isn't really doing anything? I can't just add up the HP claims on all my parts to get my total HP?
Don't blame eBay, there are plenty of other places to get scammed on this stuff.
Re:GOOD! (Score:2)
Re:Law enforcement can really apply pressure (Score:3, Informative)
Ask Steve Jackson or the Secret Service about it. It isn't everybody who can claim to have gotten $300,000 in punitive damages, and had the lead agent called incomptent by the judge, on the record, against a federal police agency.