Facebook To Fight Belgian Ban On Tracking Users (And Even Non-Users) (bloomberg.com) 57
Last year, a Belgian court ruled that Facebook would have to stop tracking Belgian internet users and delete the data it's already gathered on them, or face fines of about $280,000 a day. "Belgium's data-protection regulators have targeted the company since at least 2015 when a court ordered it to stop storing non-users' personal data," Mercury News reported at the time. Facebook is now fighting the Belgian court's decision, and will go "face to face with the Belgian data protection authority in a Brussels appeals court for a two-day hearing starting on Wednesday," reports Bloomberg. From the report: Armed with new powers since the introduction of stronger European Union data protection rules, Belgium's privacy watchdog argues Facebook "still violates the fundamental rights of millions of residents of Belgium." The Brussels Court of First Instance in February 2018 ruled that Facebook doesn't provide people with enough information about how and why it collects data on their web use, or what it does with the information. "Facebook then uses that information to profile your surfing behavior and uses that profile to show you targeted advertising, such as advertising about products and services from commercial companies, messages from political parties, etc," the Belgian regulator said in an emailed statement on Wednesday.
Belgium's data protection authority last year won the court's backing for its attack against Facebook's use of cookies, social plug-ins -- the "like" or "share" buttons -- and tracking technologies that are invisible to the naked eye to collect data on people's behavior during their visits to other sites. Facebook understands "that people want more information and control over the data Facebook receives from other websites and apps that use our services," the company said in a statement. "That's why we are developing Clear History, that will let you to see the websites and apps that send us information when you use them, disconnect this information from your account, and turn off our ability to store it associated with your account going forward," it said. "We have also made a number of changes to help people understand how our tools work and explain the choices they have, including through our privacy updates."
Belgium's data protection authority last year won the court's backing for its attack against Facebook's use of cookies, social plug-ins -- the "like" or "share" buttons -- and tracking technologies that are invisible to the naked eye to collect data on people's behavior during their visits to other sites. Facebook understands "that people want more information and control over the data Facebook receives from other websites and apps that use our services," the company said in a statement. "That's why we are developing Clear History, that will let you to see the websites and apps that send us information when you use them, disconnect this information from your account, and turn off our ability to store it associated with your account going forward," it said. "We have also made a number of changes to help people understand how our tools work and explain the choices they have, including through our privacy updates."
Re: (Score:2)
If they're saying APK is right when he's wrong (in fact every browser minus IE/Edge explicitly IGNORES the OS HOSTs settings) then lol those aren't slashdotters, they're fucking APK shills.
*Even* non-users? (Score:5, Insightful)
and even non-users
I'd say there is a certain justification for Facebook to track users - those are, after all, people who have intentionally created an account (even though they may not have been aware of the hidden tracking), and who are using the resources Facebook provides. However, tracking non-users doesn't even have this weak excuse, and should be an absolute no-no. The same is true for Google and all other data vampires.
Re:*Even* non-users? (Score:5, Interesting)
Zuckerberg sat in front of Congress last year and told them Facebook didn't use shadow profiles of non-users. It's funny that the company has been previously fighting Belgium over a practice they claim they don't use.
Under many circumstances I am usually one to trot out the old saw "don't attribute to malice ...", but frankly I consider Facebook to be fundamentally malicious - and Zuckerberg to be fundamentally an evil person. I don't know how anyone who works for Facebook can live with themselves knowing that the world would be better off without them doing their job.
Re: (Score:1)
Well they don't use "shadow profiles" , they use" Non-User data acquisition sets", a completely different thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Zuckerberg sat in front of Congress last year and told them Facebook didn't use shadow profiles of non-users. It's funny that the company has been previously fighting Belgium over a practice they claim they don't use.
Under many circumstances I am usually one to trot out the old saw "don't attribute to malice ...", but frankly I consider Facebook to be fundamentally malicious - and Zuckerberg to be fundamentally an evil person. I don't know how anyone who works for Facebook can live with themselves knowing that the world would be better off without them doing their job.
What is really needed badly is since Facebook considers that knowing users and even non-users every online activit is their right, the time is right for poisoning the tracks. Send random urls to Facebook, so that the confidence in their tracking is 0, They want tracking - give them millions of tracks. to track. And make certain that their advertisersers know that they are now getting bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
Zuckerberg sat in front of Congress last year and told them Facebook didn't use shadow profiles of non-users. It's funny that the company has been previously fighting Belgium over a practice they claim they don't use.
+1 Insightful
Under many circumstances I am usually one to trot out the old saw "don't attribute to malice ...", but frankly I consider Facebook to be fundamentally malicious - and Zuckerberg to be fundamentally an evil person. I don't know how anyone who works for Facebook can live with themselves knowing that the world would be better off without them doing their job.
Much as I dislike Facebook and discourage everyone I know from using it, I don't think Zuckerberg is an "evil" person. I think he's an amoral person who is annoyed that people object to (and attempt to thwart) some of his monetization schemes.
Re:*Even* non-users? (Score:5, Informative)
Tracking non-users is illegal in the EU, under the GDPR. Anything like that has to be opt-in.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Actually if this is a law in that country, it doesn't matter if facebook has people sign up and that is what they agree to. When did breaking the law for large companies and wealthy people become ok since contracts and stuff.
WTF people. If a country decides that it is wrong and is no longer legal then it is illegal. No matter if the person or company really want it to be legal.
Smells like big tobacco (Score:2)
This seems like they're desperate to keep this idea from gaining traction so it doesn't happen in other markets. It also seems ludicrous given Brussels.
Re: (Score:2)
Dear Zuckerfuck:
I don't use your fucking service. And yet, half of the sites I visit have your shit embedded in it for you to track me.
I haven't given you consent to track me, and I'm not signing up for an account to find out what you have and disable it.
I have Facebook.com and a few other related domains blocked in my hosts file.
It works. APK is not completely wrong.
Re: (Score:3)
Dear Zuckerfuck:
I don't use your fucking service. And yet, half of the sites I visit have your shit embedded in it for you to track me.
I haven't given you consent to track me, and I'm not signing up for an account to find out what you have and disable it.
I have Facebook.com and a few other related domains blocked in my hosts file.
It works. APK is not completely wrong.
Hopefully you use a script blocker as well. Facebook tries to hide their tracking servers, so you have to do a little research to find out which ones are FB's. Or just block all scripts.
Re: (Score:2)
You must be one of the idiots that uses IE/Edge exclusively, because FireFox/Chrome explicitly ignores the OS HOSTs file.
Facebook is a stalker (Score:4, Interesting)
How else can FB steal your metadata? (Score:3)
What's next, not letting them keep interfacing with your cell location after you left the FB app??
Re: (Score:1)
Actual European here.
Saying people want Americunt services is like saying the Chinese wanted British opium.
Personally I want all American cancer services to die, and their CEOs gutted like pigs.
China should have its own internet, and so should Europe to reflect differences in European values such as love of naked women. Not nasty prudish yank burger culture.
Re: (Score:1)
EU nations respond not with better quality products and services but with laws, censorship and taxes.
EU nations respond with requiring actual informed consent from the customer and making it very clear wheb you are interacting with FB. They also respond with the clear statement that someone who is not a customer should be considered by default as not having given informed consent.
They require the same from Baidu or Yandex. But those are simply not that popular in the EU, so it wouldn't pay to go after those services first.
Re: (Score:3)
People did not want EU service and products. They went with the US product that offered what they wanted for free.
Fine. I agree. The facebook users wanted something for free and they paid for it with their personal data.
But, I don't use Facebook. Why should they be able to collect data on me?
Please explain.
Right, since there's no defence against them tracking me, then I want my government to stop them from doing it. MY rights are being violated, not Facebooks.
Facebook couldn't care less about you. (Score:1)
"Facebook understands "that people want more information and control over the data Facebook receives from other websites and apps that use our services," the company said in a statement."
More like Facebook is trying to slow the inevitable process of people taking control of the user of their data back as much as possible, and it has billions to do so. Luckily they practically own the government at this point so they'll always have a place here in the UFSA.