back to article If your ISP is selling info about you, that has to be opt-in, says FCC boss

FCC chairman Tom Wheeler has proposed new rules that would bring ISPs in line with general data privacy laws and give citizens the right to opt out of their personal information being shared commercially. Wheeler has put forward a proposed "notice of rulemaking" to the other FCC Commissioners, who will vote on it later this …

  1. Number6

    He ought to look at a whole range of areas where companies have the cheek to charge you for keeping your data private. Telephone numbers being one obvious thing - it should not cost me to have ex-directory status for my phone number. If anything, I should be able to charge them to publish it.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Go Tom!

    Tom Wheeler is rapidly becoming my favorite guy in Government. Looking at his history there is little there that would lead you to believe he would be consumer friendly - quite the opposite actually. But he's turned out to be one of the very few people in Government with the balls to go after big cable and big telco. They must absolutely hate him, which only makes me love him more.

  3. MrTuK

    I personally think everything should default to opt out, that way they will need your explicit permission to do anything with your data.

    Many years ago I was ex-directory on BT and when they brought out a new feature called 1471 they included me, I complained and said why if I am ex-directory would I possibly want to be included in this new system that you have created called 1471, this means you are giving my number out when being on ex-directory means I don't want my number given out unless I specifically do it myself !

    The woman on the end of the phone said well if we did that to all the people on ex-directory then probably no one would probably not opt in, "Exactly" I said but I think it went completely over her head.

    1. dajames
      Headmaster

      I personally think everything should default to opt out, that way they will need your explicit permission to do anything with your data.

      Language can be non-intuitive, can't it?

      If something is described as "opt-in" that means you are "out" of it, unless you choose to opt in; if something is "opt-out" that means you are "in" it, unless you choose to opt out.

      In this case, consumers should definitely want it to be "opt-in", as the man says, so that they will be out of it by default.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        "they will be out of it by default"

        But the sheeple are already out of it by default, that's how the amoral corporate turds managed to get so much personal data in the first place.

    2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      "no one would probably not opt in"

      I see what you did there!

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "Ex directory" and "withheld number" are not the same, and while BT should have asked your permission, the A to B logic does not follow.

      Ex directory would be not publishing your number publicly. Withheld is hiding it even privately.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Coat

    Cue the threat and/or actuality of lawsuits from the major ISPs...

    (Sigh) I should have become a telecommunications law attorney. Ka-ching!!

    (Icon represents alternate-reality Legal (nee: Marketing) Hack putting on his Brooks Brothers suit.)

  5. Mark 85

    It's a pity...

    ..that companies like Google and FB can't be forced to make this type thing "opt-in".

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Flame

      Re: It's a pity...

      It is... but as I have found out, you can only use any of Googles latest features if you opt in.

      So much so, my phone that was 99% offline and avoiding Google tracking, now needs me to "sign into Google, activate the tracking, enable calander" etc just to do most basic things. I knew they were after my data, but was happy to pick and choose where and when. Now they did a bait and switch, and half the features I was using now need me to login and be tracked, I'm rather angry (see pick).

  6. This post has been deleted by its author

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Partisan split in FCC

    The way the FCC committee is designed, it is always 3-2 in favor of the party that controls the white house. So even though democrats have been in office for 7 years, it is still only 3-2, and even if the republicans take it back for 8 years it can only slide to 3-2 republican.

    1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: Partisan split in FCC

      Unfortunatekly, the way the US system works, these are sinecure jobs handed out to the "favoured sons" so it always ends up with rabid partisan politics in an area that ought to be implementing policy, not in-fighting.

      1. Charles 9

        Re: Partisan split in FCC

        Because that's par for the course in ANY government matter. It ALWAYS becomes political. Even Supreme Court justices. Even "independent" districting committees. After all, someone has to form the committees, and even the public can be swayed by politicians.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    So the NSA are OK to have your data without your permission...

    .. but if the companies who hold it try to sell it, that same government has a problem.

    Welcome to the land of the double standards

    1. Gordon 10
      FAIL

      Re: So the NSA are OK to have your data without your permission...

      Righting one wrong doesn't have any bearing on the other.

      The FCC has no power over the NSA. It does over telcos.

  9. hayzoos

    Why collect it at all?

    Um, I remember when the data in question for privacy policies was only what was needed. The question was whether we wanted to opt-out of it being shared with third parties.

    Now the data is in question is all that can be collected. And now the question is how much revenue can be generated by sharing as much as possible.

    Prior to the need for privacy policies, you worried about the gossipy drug store cashier.

    1. Charles 9

      Re: Why collect it at all?

      "Now the data is in question is all that can be collected. And now the question is how much revenue can be generated by sharing as much as possible."

      Because after the likes of Facebook and Google, people realize that what may look like junk may actually be worth its weight in platinum. It's just that no one REALIZES it yet. Better to have it on hand in case this realization dawns on you than to throw it out and regret learning of its value after the fact. In their view, holding everything costs less than the lost opportunity of throwing out something that turns out to be The Next Big Thing.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like