Norway wants Facebook behavioral advertising banned across Europe

Norway has told the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) it believes a countrywide ban on Meta harvesting user data to serve up advertising on Facebook and Instagram should be made permanent and extended across Europe. The Scandinavian country's Data Protection Authority, Datatilsynet, had been holding back Facebook parent …

[Pascal Monett]

"given that Meta has already committed to"

Bullshit. Meta has committed to nothing. All it's done is make the proper mouth noises to make the problem go away.

When it has made the corrections in code, then it has committed.

Until then, fine them a million kroner per minute. That'll make The Zuck think again.

[b0llchit]

Re: "given that Meta has already committed to"

It'll take a couple of those GDPR 4% of worldwide revenue fines before any chance for change.

[Lurko]

Re: "given that Meta has already committed to"

Big Data, banks and other large US corporations treat large fines as an inevitable consequence of doing business, anybody who thinks fines concentrate minds is kidding themselves.

Even in the UK, the energy regulator has fined energy suppliers something around 300-400m over the past few years, without any obvious signs of competence or better behaviours, and the CMA don't seem to be running out of cases to investigate.

[Rich 2]

Consent

Even if Faecesbook did/does ask for permission from its users to hoover up their data, thus does not address the issue of them hovering up everyone else’s date; people who do not and do not want to have anything to do with them.

When some random person allows Faecesbook to slurp-up the entire contents of their phone’s contact list, where is the consent from each of those people in that list?

[Korev]

Meta, which has been fielding GDPR lawsuits in Europe and the UK for years

Britain is part of Europe and unless plate tectonics gets really weird always will be...

[elsergiovolador]

Abuse

Imagine if your spouse tracked all your movements and preferences and then tailored how they speak to you in order to extract as much money and obedience from you as they can.

How would that be called?

Let's not let Facebook, Google and others monetise abusive behaviour patterns.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Abuse

>How would that be called?

Ok, I'll take the easy shot.

Marriage

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Abuse

So, Zuck is a multi-gender polygamist[*]?

There only seems to be a word a woman with multiple husbands or a man with multiple wives. It seems we don't yet have equivalent terms for people with multiple partners of varying genders :-)

[DJV]

Re: Abuse

"It seems we don't yet have equivalent terms for people with multiple partners of varying genders"

Zuckamist?

[FlamingDeath]

Re: Abuse

Data brokers

[DevOpsTimothyC]

When the fines are no longer big enough

The point the strikes me is that Meta must be making more than the fines.

If the fines are not large enough to prevent a company from breaking a law then the law makers need to make a change to protect their citizens. The most obvious that come to my mind are larger fines, jail time of senior staff, or both.

I wonder if Meta would have the gall to create a role "Legal scapegoat"

[Lurko]

Re: When the fines are no longer big enough

Convicting staff would indeed be scapegoats. Treating these offences as strict liability, and applying to company directors jointly would be good. But then, realistically, you think the EU would have any luck extraditing Zuck from the US to be convicted and sent down?

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: When the fines are no longer big enough

"But then, realistically, you think the EU would have any luck extraditing Zuck from the US to be convicted and sent down?"

Probably not, but Meta/Facebook has significant presence in EU countries, where assets can be frozen pending his surrender.

[M.V. Lipvig]

Re: When the fines are no longer big enough

Put a bounty on his head and the ink wouldn't have time to dry before he was deposited there.

[elsergiovolador]

Re: When the fines are no longer big enough

If a company keeps breaking laws and "paying off" governments, how that used to be called?

Obviously it is a sign that our governments are corrupt and complicit.

[Lurko]

Re: When the fines are no longer big enough

"Obviously it is a sign that our governments are corrupt and complicit."

When were they not? Does anyone want to stick their neck out, and call a golden age of honest government?

[nematoad]

I see.

"Take back control."

And then give it to the likes of Facebook.

There's an old Latin saying "qui bono"

Do the Tories know something that we don't?

Like a nice little business in brown paper envelopes.

[Spanners]

"trying to replace the EU legislation"

If our government manages to rush in something before the next election, would it be possible to dump these changes and reinstate the current rules again?

[Winkypop]

I’m with the Norwegians on this matter

However, keep in mind that your average Meta-Space-Cadet cares little about their privacy.

If they did, they’d not be a user of the (advert) “service”.

[J.G.Harston]

You mean, people advertising fishing equipment will be banned from only advertising in Fishing News, they'll be forced to advertise in The Grocer and Carpentry World? Advertisers target their adverts at people interested in the adverts, shock horror!

[NATTtrash]

Consent is overrated...

The British government is in the process of trying to replace the EU legislation – which is still part of UK law under the Data Protection Act – by passing the Data Protection and Digital Information bill. The new bill, on the face of it, removes several data subject protections including oversight of public surveillance cameras, and potentially data adequacy with the EU, affecting every UK business that collects and processes EU data. Lawmakers behind the bill have criticized the GDPR for having an "overemphasis on consent."

Well, with that kind of mindset, I suppose we can then also look forward to a change in the legislation concerning rape..?

[I ain't Spartacus]

Re: Consent is overrated...

Is consent the best model for protecting online privacy, when the consent is almost never informed. Most people have no clue how the internet works, how online advertising works. or just how much information Google and Facebook have built up about them.

Also the consent model has given us the fucking stupid cookie pop-ups that we now get every time we go onto a website. Whereas perhaps it would have been better to regulate cookies at the browser level, forcing browser makers to give people viable ways of controlling their own data and system.

I mean you could also try to legislate for what advertisers do, but that's a lot harder, but there are fewer browswer manufacturers, so they're easier to find, to check up on, and to punish.

Just as an example I use Safari on my iPad. And for some reason they have allowed random webmasters the right to control my fucking iPad. Which I fucking paid for. Pinch to zoom doesn't work on some websites, because the website designer is allowed to switch it off. Which means I'm forced to get our my reading glasses to read their shit, whereas for every other website I can zoom in and out to my heart's content.

There are various approaches that could be taken to cookie control. But making everyone waste a few seconds every time they visiit a new website, or a few minutes if they're going to actually read the privacy polity and drill down into the settings - doesn't seem like it's advancing the cause of privacy very much.

Not that I'm claiming our politicians won't bugger things up in some different way.

[teebie]

"overemphasis on consent."

Well that's creepy

[CowHorseFrog]

Said it before and will say it again, third party advertising needs to be banned, then all these privacy, health, mental and more issues basically go away, because theres no money in what FB and social media do.