FTC Weighs New Online Privacy Rules (wsj.com) 12
The Federal Trade Commission is considering strengthening online privacy protections, including for children, in an effort to bypass legislative logjams in Congress. WSJ: The rules under consideration could impose significant new obligations on businesses across the economy related to how they handle consumer data, people familiar with the matter said. The early talks are the latest indication of the five-member commission's more aggressive posture under its new chairwoman, Lina Khan, a Democrat who has been a vocal critic of big business, particularly large technology companies. Congressional efforts to assist the FTC in tackling perceived online privacy problems will also be the focus of a Senate Commerce Committee hearing Wednesday. If the agency chooses to move forward with an initiative, any broad new rule would likely take years to implement.
In writing new privacy rules, the FTC could follow several paths, the people said: It could look to declare certain business practices unfair or deceptive, using its authority to police such conduct. It could also tap a less-used legal authority that empowers the agency to go after what it considers unfair methods of competition, perhaps by viewing certain businesses' data-collection practices as exclusionary. The agency could also address privacy protections for children by updating its rules under the 1998 Children's Online Privacy Protection Act. And it could use its enforcement powers to target individual companies, as some privacy advocates urge.
In writing new privacy rules, the FTC could follow several paths, the people said: It could look to declare certain business practices unfair or deceptive, using its authority to police such conduct. It could also tap a less-used legal authority that empowers the agency to go after what it considers unfair methods of competition, perhaps by viewing certain businesses' data-collection practices as exclusionary. The agency could also address privacy protections for children by updating its rules under the 1998 Children's Online Privacy Protection Act. And it could use its enforcement powers to target individual companies, as some privacy advocates urge.
Weak (Score:3)
This sounds extremely weak compared to GDPR. Why just look at specific practices, which means you will be playing whack-a-mole forever? Just set out some strong ground rules and enforce them.
Re: (Score:2)
As the summary points out, that would require congress to act. It's very bad that an unelected bureaucrat can impose new rules randomly on businesses simply because Congress (which is a Democrat majority on both houses and the President) can't get its act together.
Re: Weak (Score:2)
Well, blame Congress for delegating authority to the Executive branch. They've been doing it for at least a century and both parties are equally guilty at presuming "but my guy will handle it correctly"
Re: (Score:2)
STFU. You know, perfectly well, that the GOP is blocking everything they can. Don't give me "the Democrats control" when it's that close, and too damn much requires 60 votes, not 51, and the filibuster.
Legislative Logjams in Congress (Score:2)
I knew somebody would come up with a new name for Senators and Representatives. I just didn't realize it would be so on point.
Personally I'd like there to be some form of repercussions against businesses that break privacy rules, whatever they may end up being. Currently it's the wild west and our data, no matter how personal, seems to belong to everybody but us. It's high time somebody in the government do something about it, because it's clearly not going to resolve itself. And no, congressional heari
Re: (Score:2)
I knew somebody would come up with a new name for Senators and Representatives. I just didn't realize it would be so on point.
Personally I'd like there to be some form of repercussions against businesses that break privacy rules, whatever they may end up being. Currently it's the wild west and our data, no matter how personal, seems to belong to everybody but us. It's high time somebody in the government do something about it, because it's clearly not going to resolve itself. And no, congressional hearings that are a thinly veiled attempt to pump more lobbying dollars into campaign funds aren't the "something" I'm talking about.
Isn't it time "we the people" figure out how to ban lobbying/favor currying?
I think legislation making receiving lobby money worth about 5 years in prison, per event is a start.
There are even some provisions someplace that allegedly make taking money from "foreign" sources illegal, but that doesn't seem to be tracked, much less punished.
Re: (Score:2)
That's the true joy of it. "We the people" don't get to write the laws. The fuckwits that get the lobbying money write them. Nobody's gonna stop their own meal ticket.
So, you should now pose online as a child? (Score:3)
If you want privacy, that is? Asking for a friend.
who owns the data?? (Score:2)
Re: who owns the data?? (Score:2)
When the data involves action by two parties to produce (both the user and the company providing information the user is requesting), then it's tough to claim the user has sole ownership of the data generated by the interaction.
Need to outlaw spying without an account (Score:2)
If facebook wants to record my phone number, email, name etc, they should be required to get me to sign up for their service. And require the cookies etc. to be in the name of the company you have an account with.
Yes, this would outlaw most internet tracking schemes. Those would be the vile, corrupt ones. Facebook would survive, as would all the other companies that offer real services.
We would end up with fewer but fairer privacy invasions.
Worthless Government (Score:3)
It's become obvious that congress is absolutely useless for doing anything but funneling money to "campaign donors" so now people who actually care about doing their jobs well are trying to find workarounds. This is the state of the country that we live in. It's not going to last if things continue this way.