Senate Resolution to let ISP's Share Private Data Without Permission

Zarathustra[H]

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
38,082
Well, maybe it is time to sign up for that VPN service after all. Remember those sweeping privacy rules the FCC put in place back in October? Well, the Senate is apparently looking to undo them, removing the requirement that users "opt-in" before their sensitive personal data such as geolocation and web browsing history is shared. The FCC rule also allowed users to opt-out of the sharing of non-sensitive data such as email addresses and service tier data.

The argument in favor is that the FCC's regulation is harmful, as it sets different standards for search engine providers and ISP's.

It is unclear as to whether or not this resolution will pass. While Joint Resolutions are binding, they require the approval of both chambers of congress. Even without this resolution, the privacy rules approved by the FCC in October were already in trouble, as FCC chairman Ajit Pai is on the record preferring uniform rules for privacy on the internet.

"It aims to provide for congressional disapproval of the FCC rule relating to ‘‘Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services’’ under the Congressional Review Act, a 1996 law that empowers Congress to repeal federal regulations, according to a statement issued by Flake, who is also chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the Law. The resolution under the CRA would also prevent the FCC from issuing “similarly harmful regulations” in the future, it added."

Reminder: Arguing about politics is against our forum rules. Let's please keep it on topic and as civil as possible to avoid getting the thread locked.
 
Last edited:
Last time I checked search engines and isps are 2 different things so all this "your not treating us the same" nonsense seems moot to begin with. Most people don't have a choice on their isp, but can choose what search engine they want to use. Finally the fcc doesn't have authority over search engines like they do over isps. All of this just follows the path of our current president. Remove pretty much all "regulations" against companies when ever we can no matter if those regulations are there to protect us, the people, or not because businesses wants to make more money.
 
There are a lot of positives to this.
I don't really trust the ISPs to not collect data. They do it all the time. Whether or not they can sell it is the key. I'm sure they've already figured out ways to sell it without violating the law. We've seen many companies before do this same thing.
I really do hope it raises awareness so that people start to think about their own privacy and take steps to improve it. Encryption, vpns and more of a focus on security will help the end users achieve the level of privacy that regulations could never guarantee.
 
Hypergreatthing said:
There are a lot of positives to this.
I don't really trust the ISPs to not collect data. They do it all the time. Whether or not they can sell it is the key. I'm sure they've already figured out ways to sell it without violating the law. We've seen many companies before do this same thing.
I really do hope it raises awareness so that people start to think about their own privacy and take steps to improve it. Encryption, vpns and more of a focus on security will help the end users achieve the level of privacy that regulations could never guarantee.
Click to expand...


Agreed. Don't get me wrong here. I don't really care for what search engines are doing either, but at least I have a better understanding of how it works. They are fairly transparent and have privacy policies I understand the gist of. They anonymously summarize data in order to present the best, most relevant ads. I'm using their services for free, and this is what pays for it, so I can live with that, even though it has a bit of an "ick" factor associated with it.

ISP's on the other hand. I'm already paying them a princely sum for my service, they have privacy policies about as transparent as a brick wall, and they have access to WAY more sensitive data, not to mention mobile carriers. Mobile carriers even have my moment to moment location data, and while a VPN may defeat tracking which websites you visit, there is no VPN in the world that can hide your geolocation from your mobile provider...
 
Voted for Trump because there wasn't another choice this election. But some of these decisions of people he's put in charge just stink of rich guy data mining and intrusion on privacy. NOT HAPPY.
 
ISP's continuously wanting more power and profits. It's not really that different from past companies, though. Get big enough to be able to influence politics, use it to your advantage, take control, expand your company, use the political process to remove barriers, more profits....

ISP's aren't really ISP's anymore. They are brokers and content providers. They'll sell you what you want and sell others your information. It's no longer just transporting bits back and forth like it was in the old days. Before the dark times. Before the Empire.
 
tikiman2012 said:
Did people really expect anything less from this administration? (rhetorical question)
Click to expand...

Well, my conservative party is about less gov't, but supposed to look out for stuff like this. I guess it's just about pulling all stops with gov't. I'm all for less gov't where there is abuse, but the FCC made good strides in this area.
 
Even if the original one would of passed requiring up to opt-in, it would of most likely been "opt-in or you can't use our services."
 
Ur_Mom said:
ISP's continuously wanting more power and profits. It's not really that different from past companies, though. Get big enough to be able to influence politics, use it to your advantage, take control, expand your company, use the political process to remove barriers, more profits....
Click to expand...
you left out prevent competition
 
WTF has happened to Privacy in this country.

The degradation started with good old GWBush. This shit really bothers me.

I hope warrants are still required.
 
This is one example of how both parties are pretty much the same and getting more extreme. Pushing their agenda beyond what is logical, pushing the pendulum to the opposite side of sanity just to say they did something against their evil corrupt opponent.
regulations bad... mmmmkay... remove them all... Lets forget there are actually good regulations...

disparity bad mmmmkay... Lets create 100 more sex classes cause they should be special, when one or two would do... Then I want to have a box called lumber sexual, somewhat grumpy white guy... and get off my lawn. Please check your preferred sex box on pages 1-10...
 
Nukester said:
Voted for Trump because there wasn't another choice this election. But some of these decisions of people he's put in charge just stink of rich guy data mining and intrusion on privacy. NOT HAPPY.
Click to expand...

In all fairness, this isn't the Chairman's first time around the block.

President Donald Trump has officially nominated current FCC Chairman and net neutrality opponent Ajit Pai for another five-year term on the commission, Axios reported on Tuesday.

The man already had the Job, Trump left him in place. Yes it was still the Donald's choice to keep the guy on, not saying otherwise.

And I am not one who has closely followed Trumps picks but I recall many headlines that lend the impression that many of Trump's picks aren't necessarily all in agreement with the President's views on things. Maybe that's a good thing. An administration that isn't all about toadying up to the boss's arse.
 
lcpiper said:
In all fairness, this isn't the Chairman's first time around the block.

President Donald Trump has officially nominated current FCC Chairman and net neutrality opponent Ajit Pai for another five-year term on the commission, Axios reported on Tuesday.

The man already had the Job, Trump left him in place. Yes it was still the Donald's choice to keep the guy on, not saying otherwise.

And I am not one who has closely followed Trumps picks but I recall many headlines that lend the impression that many of Trump's picks aren't necessarily all in agreement with the President's views on things. Maybe that's a good thing. An administration that isn't all about toadying up to the boss's arse.
Click to expand...

Points taken, well said.
 
lcpiper said:
In all fairness, this isn't the Chairman's first time around the block.

President Donald Trump has officially nominated current FCC Chairman and net neutrality opponent Ajit Pai for another five-year term on the commission, Axios reported on Tuesday.

The man already had the Job, Trump left him in place. Yes it was still the Donald's choice to keep the guy on, not saying otherwise.

And I am not one who has closely followed Trumps picks but I recall many headlines that lend the impression that many of Trump's picks aren't necessarily all in agreement with the President's views on things. Maybe that's a good thing. An administration that isn't all about toadying up to the boss's arse.
Click to expand...


Yeah, but to be fair Ajit Pai only ascended to the role after Tom Wheeler resigned in January. He was serving out the remainder of Tom Wheeler's term.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Yeah, but to be fair Ajit Pai only ascended to the role after Tom Wheeler resigned in January. He was serving out the remainder of Tom Wheeler's term.
Click to expand...

Oh, I wasn't aware, Thanx.

I thought we had been bad mouthing this guy much much longer than just January. He must be a big splash type :sneaky:
 
Ok, this just shows that those elected will do the bidding of the lobbyists and not the constituents. There's really no other valid reason besides the corporations complaining that this hurts their bottomline because no-one was going to opt-in.

Here's a thought, entice people to opt-in with service upgrades or discounts. Oh wait, that doesn't give you something for nothing (profiteering on your customers private data), so that's out of the realm of possibility.
 
azuza001 said:
Last time I checked search engines and isps are 2 different things so all this "your not treating us the same" nonsense seems moot to begin with. Most people don't have a choice on their isp, but can choose what search engine they want to use. Finally the fcc doesn't have authority over search engines like they do over isps. All of this just follows the path of our current president. Remove pretty much all "regulations" against companies when ever we can no matter if those regulations are there to protect us, the people, or not because businesses wants to make more money.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, I don't like the idea of any of them being able to sell the data. However your argument is a tad off point. Regardless if you have a choice or not, it is still legal for the search engines to do it without any permission. So no matter what sites you go to, everyone on the internet can sell your information for profit. The only group that can't is the ISP because they play by different rules. Which would be different if everyone that was able to wasn't currently selling whatever they could. We all know that Facebook and Google make money by selling information. Might as well toss in every other big name out there. So what the argument is comes down to is it ok for your information to be sold by 6 different people every day vs wrong for a 7th to jump in. Because you already gave every site that you visit permission by visiting them and being online period.

we need to swing that the other way and make it an even field but by saying it has to be opt-in for everyone and anyone that is caught selling information otherwise can face fines similar to other policies out there.
 
Exavior said:
Don't get me wrong, I don't like the idea of any of them being able to sell the data. However your argument is a tad off point. Regardless if you have a choice or not, it is still legal for the search engines to do it without any permission. So no matter what sites you go to, everyone on the internet can sell your information for profit. The only group that can't is the ISP because they play by different rules. Which would be different if everyone that was able to wasn't currently selling whatever they could. We all know that Facebook and Google make money by selling information. Might as well toss in every other big name out there. So what the argument is comes down to is it ok for your information to be sold by 6 different people every day vs wrong for a 7th to jump in. Because you already gave every site that you visit permission by visiting them and being online period.

we need to swing that the other way and make it an even field but by saying it has to be opt-in for everyone and anyone that is caught selling information otherwise can face fines similar to other policies out there.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I pay my isp to go online, they are already getting money from me. I don't pay Google or Facebook so I expect them to try and make a buck off me. If my isp wants to lower my bill and collect my data then maybe we can talk (but not this stupid ass 5$ discount stuff they like to offer, I mean a real discount). But they don't. They want to charge me and the use me as well.

Besides like I said before, the fcc is only able to deal with the groups that they are allowed to. That's the isps. It's the equivalent of "but Mom, all the other parents let their kids do it" . We all know that's a bad argument to start with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top