Privacy groups want FTC to oppose Facebook's policy changes

IDG News Service - Six privacy groups have asked the U.S. Federal Trade Commission to strike down proposed changes to Facebook's policies, as they violate a 2011 settlement with the agency over user privacy.

"The changes will allow Facebook to routinely use the images and names of Facebook users for commercial advertising without consent," the groups wrote in a letter Wednesday to the FTC. The groups asked the commission to enforce its 2011 order.

Facebook announced in August proposed updates to its Data Use Policy and Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, two key documents that explain how the social network collects and uses people's data.

In the revised Statement, Facebook states that by joining the site, users "permit a business or other entity to pay us to display your name and/or profile picture with your content or information, without any compensation to you." In the original Statement, people can use their privacy settings "to limit how your name and profile picture may be associated with commercial, sponsored, or related content (such as a brand you like) served or enhanced by us," the groups said.

The changes proposed by Facebook follow the approval by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco division of a US$20 million fund for Facebook to settle a class-action lawsuit against the site's "sponsored stories" advertising program. The complainants, some acting on behalf of minors, had alleged that their names and likeness had been used without their prior consent in "sponsored stories" advertisements shown to their online friends on the social networking website.(

"The pending changes arise from a class action settlement in which the attorneys who purported to represent the interests of Facebook users granted the company a right that was contrary to the company's policy at the time the litigation was initiated," wrote the groups, which include the Electronic Privacy Information Center, Center for Digital Democracy, Consumer Watchdog, Patient Privacy Rights, U.S. PIRG, and the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse.

As a result, Facebook users who "reasonably believed" that their images and content would not be used for commercial purposes without their consent could find their pictures showing up on the pages of their friends, endorsing the products of Facebook's advertisers, the groups wrote. "Remarkably, their images could even be used by Facebook to endorse products that the user does not like or even use," they added.

The groups also object to what they consider a "deemed consent" that Facebook requires from minors. Under the proposed changes, minors have only to represent that at least one of their parents or legal guardians has also agreed to the terms of the section, and the use of their name, profile picture, content, and information, on their behalf. Such deemed consent "eviscerates any meaningful limits over the commercial exploitation of the images and names of young Facebook users," the groups wrote.

Facebook said the proposed update did not change its ad practices or policies, but only made things clearer to people who use the service. "As part of this proposed update, we revised our explanation of how things like your name, profile picture and content may be used in connection with ads or commercial content to make it clear that you are granting Facebook permission for this use when you use our services," wrote a Facebook spokeswoman in an email.

John Ribeiro covers outsourcing and general technology breaking news from India for The IDG News Service. Follow John on Twitter at @Johnribeiro. John's e-mail address is john_ribeiro@idg.com

Reprinted with permission from IDG.net. Story copyright 2012 International Data Group. All rights reserved.

View the original article here

Privacy groups want FTC to oppose Facebook's policy changes

IDG News Service - Six privacy groups have asked the U.S. Federal Trade Commission to strike down proposed changes to Facebook's policies, as they violate a 2011 settlement with the agency over user privacy.

"The changes will allow Facebook to routinely use the images and names of Facebook users for commercial advertising without consent," the groups wrote in a letter Wednesday to the FTC. The groups asked the commission to enforce its 2011 order.

Facebook announced in August proposed updates to its Data Use Policy and Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, two key documents that explain how the social network collects and uses people's data.

In the revised Statement, Facebook states that by joining the site, users "permit a business or other entity to pay us to display your name and/or profile picture with your content or information, without any compensation to you." In the original Statement, people can use their privacy settings "to limit how your name and profile picture may be associated with commercial, sponsored, or related content (such as a brand you like) served or enhanced by us," the groups said.

The changes proposed by Facebook follow the approval by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco division of a US$20 million fund for Facebook to settle a class-action lawsuit against the site's "sponsored stories" advertising program. The complainants, some acting on behalf of minors, had alleged that their names and likeness had been used without their prior consent in "sponsored stories" advertisements shown to their online friends on the social networking website.(

"The pending changes arise from a class action settlement in which the attorneys who purported to represent the interests of Facebook users granted the company a right that was contrary to the company's policy at the time the litigation was initiated," wrote the groups, which include the Electronic Privacy Information Center, Center for Digital Democracy, Consumer Watchdog, Patient Privacy Rights, U.S. PIRG, and the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse.

As a result, Facebook users who "reasonably believed" that their images and content would not be used for commercial purposes without their consent could find their pictures showing up on the pages of their friends, endorsing the products of Facebook's advertisers, the groups wrote. "Remarkably, their images could even be used by Facebook to endorse products that the user does not like or even use," they added.

The groups also object to what they consider a "deemed consent" that Facebook requires from minors. Under the proposed changes, minors have only to represent that at least one of their parents or legal guardians has also agreed to the terms of the section, and the use of their name, profile picture, content, and information, on their behalf. Such deemed consent "eviscerates any meaningful limits over the commercial exploitation of the images and names of young Facebook users," the groups wrote.

Facebook said the proposed update did not change its ad practices or policies, but only made things clearer to people who use the service. "As part of this proposed update, we revised our explanation of how things like your name, profile picture and content may be used in connection with ads or commercial content to make it clear that you are granting Facebook permission for this use when you use our services," wrote a Facebook spokeswoman in an email.

John Ribeiro covers outsourcing and general technology breaking news from India for The IDG News Service. Follow John on Twitter at @Johnribeiro. John's e-mail address is john_ribeiro@idg.com

Reprinted with permission from IDG.net. Story copyright 2012 International Data Group. All rights reserved.

View the original article here

Privacy groups ask FTC to oppose Facebook's policy changes

Six privacy groups have asked the U.S. Federal Trade Commission to strike down proposed changes to Facebook's policies, as they violate a 2011 settlement with the agency over user privacy.

"The changes will allow Facebook to routinely use the images and names of Facebook users for commercial advertising without consent," the groups wrote in a letter Wednesday to the FTC. The groups asked the commission to enforce its 2011 order.

Facebook announced in August proposed updates to its Data Use Policy and Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, two key documents that explain how the social network collects and uses people's data.

In the revised Statement, Facebook states that by joining the site, users "permit a business or other entity to pay us to display your name and/or profile picture with your content or information, without any compensation to you." In the original Statement, people can use their privacy settings "to limit how your name and profile picture may be associated with commercial, sponsored, or related content (such as a brand you like) served or enhanced by us," the groups said.

The changes proposed by Facebook follow the approval by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco division of a US$20 million fund for Facebook to settle a class-action lawsuit against the site's "sponsored stories" advertising program. The complainants, some acting on behalf of minors, had alleged that their names and likeness had been used without their prior consent in "sponsored stories" advertisements shown to their online friends on the social networking website.(

"The pending changes arise from a class action settlement in which the attorneys who purported to represent the interests of Facebook users granted the company a right that was contrary to the company's policy at the time the litigation was initiated," wrote the groups, which include the Electronic Privacy Information Center, Center for Digital Democracy, Consumer Watchdog, Patient Privacy Rights, U.S. PIRG, and the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse.

As a result, Facebook users who "reasonably believed" that their images and content would not be used for commercial purposes without their consent could find their pictures showing up on the pages of their friends, endorsing the products of Facebook's advertisers, the groups wrote. "Remarkably, their images could even be used by Facebook to endorse products that the user does not like or even use," they added.

The groups also object to what they consider a "deemed consent" that Facebook requires from minors. Under the proposed changes, minors have only to represent that at least one of their parents or legal guardians has also agreed to the terms of the section, and the use of their name, profile picture, content, and information, on their behalf. Such deemed consent "eviscerates any meaningful limits over the commercial exploitation of the images and names of young Facebook users," the groups wrote.

Facebook said the proposed update did not change its ad practices or policies, but only made things clearer to people who use the service. "As part of this proposed update, we revised our explanation of how things like your name, profile picture and content may be used in connection with ads or commercial content to make it clear that you are granting Facebook permission for this use when you use our services," wrote a Facebook spokeswoman in an email.

John Ribeiro covers outsourcing and general technology breaking news from India for The IDG News Service. Follow John on Twitter at @Johnribeiro. John's e-mail address is john_ribeiro@idg.com

John Ribeiro covers outsourcing and general technology breaking news from India for The IDG News Service.
More by John Ribeiro, IDG News Service

View the original article here

Facebook’s data policy changes put your face front and center

Sorry, I could not read the content fromt this page.

View the original article here

U.S. senators push for changes in NSA data collection

Several U.S. senators will push for changes in the way the National Security Agency collects the telephone records of millions of U.S. residents, with lawmakers saying they will focus on making the NSA program more transparent to the public.

Some members of the Senate Judiciary Committee said Wednesday they will introduce legislation targeting the NSA telephone records collection program.

Senator Al Franken, a Minnesota Democrat, said he will introduce a bill this week that requires the NSA and other agencies to make public the number of U.S. residents they have collected information on, and how many resident have had their information reviewed by federal agents. The bill would also allow companies to disclose the number of surveillance requests they get from government agencies, a change Google, Microsoft and other companies have asked for.

“There is a critical problem at the center of this debate and that’s the lack of transparency around these programs,” Franken said at a committee hearing on NSA surveillance programs. The secrecy around the NSA surveillance programs is “bad for privacy and bad for democracy,” he added.

Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Connecticut Democrat, said he will push for the data collection process at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to include lawyers serving as public advocates who can oppose surveillance requests from the NSA and other agencies. Including opposing lawyers would help create public trust in the program, he said.

But Stewart Baker, a partner at the Steptoe & Johnson law firm and a former NSA general counsel, questioned if adding new public advocates to the surveillance request process would calm public fears about the NSA programs, revealed in June by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.

With the public advocate lawyers paid by the U.S. government, some critics may still argue the process is “really just a sham,” Baker said.

Even Senator Dianne Feinstein, D-California, chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee and vocal supporter of NSA surveillance programs, called for the agency to make its efforts more transparent. The agency should reduce the number of years it keeps phone records from five to two or three and should release more information about the number of times a company has to give up records, she said.

Committee members didn’t call for the NSA to abolish the surveillance programs, however. Civil liberties groups, however, called for wider changes to the programs, beyond transparency and new public advocates in the court process.

“It’s become clear that the NSA is engaged in far-reaching, intrusive and unlawful surveillance of Americans’ phone calls and electronic communications,” said Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, which has filed a lawsuit against the NSA. An overhaul of the program and the law behind it is needed, he said.

On Wednesday, more than 100 digital rights and other organizations released a list of 13 principles related to human rights and electronic surveillance. Governments must “limit surveillance to that which is strictly and demonstrably necessary to achieve a legitimate aim,” and they must conduct surveillance only when there’s a “high degree of probability that a serious crime has been or will be committed,” the document said.

Among the groups signing the human rights document were the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Free Press, the Free Software Foundation Europe and Reporters Without Borders.

Several members of the committee, both Republicans and Democrats, questioned the breadth of the NSA telephone records collection program, with senators asking how the NSA can classify nearly all U.S. telephone records as relevant to an antiterrorism investigation, as required in the Patriot Act. The hearing largely ignored the NSA’s so-called Prism program, which collects the content of email and other Internet communications of targets believed to be outside the U.S.

The U.S. government needs to find a better balance between security needs and privacy, said Senator Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat and committee chairman.

“We could have more security if we strip-searched everybody who came into every building in America, but we’re not going to do that,” Leahy sad. “We could have more security if ... we put a wiretap on everybody’s cell phone in America, if we search everybody’s home. But there are certain areas of our own privacy that we Americans expect.”

Other senators defended Prism and the phone records collection, saying they have helped keep the U.S. safe from terrorist attacks. The phone records collection program doesn’t collect the content of phone calls and several courts have ruled that the collection of business records doesn’t violate the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment protecting U.S. residents from unreasonable searches and seizures, said Senator Jeff Sessions, an Alabama Republican.

“I’m inclined to think all of these actions are consistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States,” he said.

The phone records program has played an important part in several antiterrorism investigations, added Sean Joyce, deputy director of the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation. Terrorists are “trying to harm America,” he said. “They’re trying to strike America. We need all these tools.”

Still, representatives of the NSA and U.S. Department of Justice said they are open to making changes to the records collection program so that the public can have more confidence in the process. President Barack Obama’s administration is open to changes that would make the programs more transparent to the public, said Robert Litt, general counsel of the U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

Grant Gross covers technology and telecom policy in the U.S. government for The IDG News Service.
More by Grant Gross, IDG News Service

View the original article here