Andy Smith wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 05:50:55PM +0000, LinuxLearner wrote:
>> Which in my view is most probably a breach of Data Protection Act
>> provisions. e.g. I get regular 'invites' from Facebook, though I have
>> never given Facebook consent to email me (nor ever given anyone I know
>> consent to give Facebook my email). This infuriates me, no end: it's
>> SPAM, plain and simple, which *big* business gets away with.
>
> But this is the Facebook users wanting to contact you. How else
> could it work?
Maybe it shouldn't work. ;) Maybe, just maybe, *I* should control data
about myself, and no other, without *my* consent. {period}.
Put another way ... Just because I can rape your wife, doesn't mean I
should be allowed to. Same applies, IMNSHO, to data-rape, which is
clearly, IMNSHO, what Facebook is involved in, along with Google, et al.
But to put a less emotive and much more practical solution forwards:
they could email me themselves? It's not complicated, is it? ... After
all, in this scenario, they've clearly already got my email, right!?! ;)
The problem we have ATM is that anyone that knows data about me can
publish it, whether to the web generally, or by giving it to a company
like Facebook ... No protection against this 'data-leak' exists
currently AFAIK, but admittedly I'm slightly out of touch with the
legals these days (because essentially they're irrelevant - I much
prefer to take practical protections seriously - like posting to lists
pseudonymously! <g>). Even when it comes to e.g. family, they may not
know of, or care to know of, my need(s) for privacy.
As an barrister who has been potentially responsible for putting away
some of the world's nastiest crooks, I can tell you (from personal
experience) this can be life-threatening. Pure hell.
> It would be better if people were taught that it's a faux pas (at
> least) to give their friends' email addresses out just as much as it
> would be to give their friends' phone numbers out. But they're not,
> so what to do?
Make it illegal to post *personally identifiable* info that is not
already in the public domain. Again, this isn't so complicated, is it?
I mean, if you didn't know, the Police, security services, etc, have
this protection. Why not the general public??
But again, to answer more practically, ... Get 'better' friends, who
understand needs or wants of their friends. That's been my strategy ...
Unfortunately one cannot chose family. :(
> At least Facebook are only relaying messages that people you know
> want you to receive.
What makes you think I only get facebook messages from people I know?
More importantly, what makes you think Facebook should be legally
allowed (if it be legal) to email me REPEATEDLY (like once a month or
whatever it is), *after* I've not taken them up on their not so kind
SPAMMED offer to 'join' this data-mining operation the first time?
As I now know you don't mind me signing you up to lists that make you
opt-out (rather than opt-in), expect a deluge of SPAM from all sorts of
companies I'll sign your email up to over the weeks ahead; then you'll
get the idea I'm conveying here (not too successfully it would seem).*
If you contacted Facebook and told them to never
> do so, probably this would stop.
Ibid; so you think lists should be opt-out??????? I'm quite surprised,
most especially as you are a service provider it would seem.
Do you have no idea of the chaos this would create, the trillions in
lost productive time, over say one/five/ten years?
Naturally this opt-out nature is
> not ideal.
A-hah ... So the penny did drop after all! <g> Opt-out is called SPAM,
by any sensible definition, though a debate censored off the Surrey
list, I'm glad this has had some airing here. No one yet though, has
been able to give me a sensible reply (ever) as to why *big* business is
allowed to get away with this SPAMMING and small business' are not. (?)
> When you give someone your email address sadly you have no idea what
> they will do with it. Companies have to have a privacy policy,
> individuals don't, even if they should...
>
> A more legitimate gripe with many sites like Facebook IMHO is that they
> don't make clear what they are about to do.
If you find a site in England and Wales that doesn't state what it's
going to do with your data, they *are* in breach of the Data Protection
Act. No doubts about it. Report them:
http://www.dpa.gov.uk
Upon which point (and not deliberately trying to be obstreperous as I do
believe you're likely *trying* to be one of the good guys ... but
forgive me as I couldn't resist a quick peek), a quick search reveals
neither Andy Smith, Andrew Smith, nor Bitfolk Ltd *seem* to be
registered as data controllers as required by law ... Which rather puts
your businesses claim "BitFolk takes your privacy very seriously" in a
somewhat, shall we say, a laughable light, when your entire (relevant)
public website's contents (AFAICT on 2 second glance) states:
"Data Protection Policy
BitFolk takes your privacy very seriously. We will only contact you to
resolve operational or billing matters and for that we will use the
contact details provided by you. Your details will never be disclosed
unless we are legally obliged to.
..... "
FWIW, I do find the "Your details will never be disclosed unless we are
legally obliged to." positively inspiring, but would prefer to read
"Your details will never be disclosed unless we are served with a
*valid* warrant, *after* notifying you *before* disclosing your details
(where ever lawfully possible).
Don't worry; I won't send a bill! :) But you are displaying what we
northerners call a bit of the 'Pot calling the kettle black', when you
gripe about businesses not being compliant, but yours isn't, either.
It's not in their
> interest to say, "when you give us your details we're going to send
> an email to everyone in your address book and you'll have no
> opportunity to choose who gets it."
It's their legal obligation to say (both on the website, and via the
details available from an ICO search result, if taking data in the UK,
is my understanding, FWIW). Of course, these provisions can lawfully be
avoided, but for that info, I'd charge a business consultancy fee! LOL
That's not a pitch BTW ... I'm not taking any clients at all ATM! <g>
Best,
LL
* Don't panic, it's only a joke to make you get the point! ;)
