UK authorities raid Cambridge Analytica

[fuelair]

The 'victim' is the individuals(s) whom the personal data is about. Depending on exactly how that data has been collected and processed, Facebook and Cambridge could both be on the hook for how that was handled.

I would certainly love to see both destroyed completely - and nothing out to replace either.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Facebook TOS cannot circumvent UK law, if the data ended up within UK jurisdiction.

I guess I could make an ironic comparison with how US authorities claimed jurisdiction over and prosecuted the NatWest Three....

And I'm asking for details on the UK law.

 

[Information Analyst]

Okay, that makes sense. None of this would be a problem if we scrapped spending limits.

Which would be a terrible idea.

 

[Information Analyst]

And I'm asking for details on the UK law.

Data Protection Act and the rules limiting election spending.

 

[fuelair]

Well, one example would be election spending without lending your official imprimatur to the electioneering material. An employer of mine, years ago, got in trouble in this way by handing out a leaflet urging their employees to vote a certain way in a UK general election. That was illegal.

There are also legal limits on the amount that can be spent. Getting an unofficial top-up to that spending limit from 'secret buddies' would be illegal I believe.

I am liking a law precluding more than a single $10.00 donation to any candidate by any individual or company or group.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Which would be a terrible idea.

Why?

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Which would be a terrible idea.

Bob wants us to have all the democracy you can buy.

 

[psionl0]

The High Court granted the data watchdog a warrant amid claims the firm amassed information about millions of people without their consent, based on a 2014 quiz on Facebook.

Given the reams of legalese that you click "I AGREE" to when you do these activities, I am surprised that the people who participated in this quiz hadn't agreed that the information could be sold to the devil if facebook wanted to.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Given the reams of legalese that you click "I AGREE" to when you do these activities, I am surprised that the people who participated in this quiz hadn't agreed that the information could be sold to the devil if facebook wanted to.

That was my thought as well, but people here are confident that UK law makes an exception.

 

[fagin]

That was my thought as well, but people here are confident that UK law makes an exception.

It's EU law.

https://www.gov.uk/data-protection

"Everyone responsible for using data has to follow strict rules called ‘data protection principles’. They must make sure the information is:

used fairly and lawfully
used for limited, specifically stated purposes used in a way that is adequate, relevant and not excessive accuratekept for no longer than is absolutely necessary
handled according to people’s data protection rights
kept safe and secure
not transferred outside the European Economic Area without adequate protection"

And is getting expanded and tightened up in May.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/connect...ss-networks/bt/data-protection-laws-changing/

"And consent will mean active agreement. It can no longer be inferred from, say, a pre-ticked box. Companies that control how and why data is processed will have to show a clear audit trail of consent, including screen grabs or saved consent forms.

Individuals also have the right to withdraw consent at any time, easily and swiftly. When somebody does withdraw consent, their details must be permanently erased, and not just deleted from a mailing list. GDPR gives individuals the right to be forgotten."

 

[Darat]

Given the reams of legalese that you click "I AGREE" to when you do these activities, I am surprised that the people who participated in this quiz hadn't agreed that the information could be sold to the devil if facebook wanted to.

But as has been said in the UK regardless of what you may have agreed to in any terms and conditions data protection legislation still applies.

 

[ddt]

But as has been said in the UK regardless of what you may have agreed to in any terms and conditions data protection legislation still applies.

UK or EU law does only apply there, not in Hell. So the Devil would be off the hook, not though some of his earthly representatives, e.g., Alexander Nix.

 

[BobTheCoward]

It's EU law.

https://www.gov.uk/data-protection

"Everyone responsible for using data has to follow strict rules called ‘data protection principles’. They must make sure the information is:

used fairly and lawfully
used for limited, specifically stated purposes used in a way that is adequate, relevant and not excessive accuratekept for no longer than is absolutely necessary
handled according to people’s data protection rights
kept safe and secure
not transferred outside the European Economic Area without adequate protection"

And is getting expanded and tightened up in May.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/connect...ss-networks/bt/data-protection-laws-changing/

"And consent will mean active agreement. It can no longer be inferred from, say, a pre-ticked box. Companies that control how and why data is processed will have to show a clear audit trail of consent, including screen grabs or saved consent forms.

Individuals also have the right to withdraw consent at any time, easily and swiftly. When somebody does withdraw consent, their details must be permanently erased, and not just deleted from a mailing list. GDPR gives individuals the right to be forgotten."

Any chance you have definitions for those words?
If I start a company, how do i know if my policy is "limited" for purposes of EU law?

ETA: I understand my question probably doesn't matter. But it did make me curious, you seem to have ready access to the law, so I figured no harm in asking.

 

[Aber]

Any chance you have definitions for those words?
If I start a company, how do i know if my policy is "limited" for purposes of EU law?

ETA: I understand my question probably doesn't matter. But it did make me curious, you seem to have ready access to the law, so I figured no harm in asking.

How about you do some legwork?

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/

 

[BobTheCoward]

How about you do some legwork?

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/

Because others will do it for me.

 

[3point14]

UK or EU law does only apply there, not in Hell. So the Devil would be off the hook, not though some of his earthly representatives, e.g., Alexander Nix.

(There's also legislation on transferring the data into other areas with fewer controls)

 

[BobTheCoward]

(There's also legislation on transferring the data into other areas with fewer controls)

Gosh darn. I can't believe all their odium directed at two people reaching their own agreement.

 

[ojno]

But as has been said in the UK regardless of what you may have agreed to in any terms and conditions data protection legislation still applies.

I believe the main issues are ^ that, as well as UK law being quite sympathetic to the consumer when it comes to hiding terms in small print, but more to the point: the 50m friends of those who did consent, however informed or otherwise, definitely didn't, and (pre 2014 or whenever) all their data was downloaded as well. You can't agree on someone else's behalf.

 

[BobTheCoward]

I believe the main issues are ^ that, as well as UK law being quite sympathetic to the consumer when it comes to hiding terms in small print, but more to the point: the 50m friends of those who did consent, however informed or otherwise, definitely didn't, and (pre 2014 or whenever) all their data was downloaded as well. You can't agree on someone else's behalf.

Their sympathy manifests as some extremely anti consumer law.

 

[ddt]

(There's also legislation on transferring the data into other areas with fewer controls)

Which only exacerbates the crime. Steve Bannon would be well-advised not to travel to the UK (or anywhere in the EU for about a year from now).

The Devil poses a whole new category of problems:
- does he have legal personhood?
- the last documented time he showed up on earth is over 500 years ago
- when assigning police officers to try to arrest him in Hell, you'll have to wait until the Last Judgment to see if they actually go there.

Gosh darn. I can't believe all their odium directed at two people reaching their own agreement.

Two people? You mean someone clicking a EULA on a small Facebook quiz and the company behind the quiz which has reams of lawyers to draw up that EULA?

There are very good reasons why states that care about the "little people" make laws that restrict what you can agree to in contracts between two legal persons with a clear power imbalance.

Given the reams of legalese that you click "I AGREE" to when you do these activities, I am surprised that the people who participated in this quiz hadn't agreed that the information could be sold to the devil if facebook wanted to.

As I understand it, the rabbit hole goes even deeper. Cambridge Analytica not only used the profiles of users who had clicked on such an "I agree" button, which only numbered in the tens of thousands, but through a loophole in Facebook's permissions, also got hold on profiles of others who hadn't (their friends?), totaling some 50 million people.