WhatsApp Fined Over $260 Million for EU Privacy Violations (cnet.com) 22
WhatsApp didn't fully explain to Europeans how it uses their data as called for by EU privacy law, Ireland's Data Protection Commission said on Thursday. The regulator hit the messaging app with a fine of 225 million euros, about $267 million. From a report: Partly at issue is how WhatsApp share information with parent company Facebook, according to the commission. The decision brings an end to a GDPR inquiry the privacy regulator started in December 2018. WhatsApp said it disagrees with the decision and plans to appeal. "We have worked to ensure the information we provide is transparent and comprehensive and will continue to do so," a WhatsApp spokesperson said via email.
That's a good start... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Which is why there is provision to fine up to 4% of global turnover. Perhaps for these gigabucks companies the maximum should be the norm.
Re: That's a good start... (Score:2)
WhatsApp = 8 billion revenue (Score:3)
I'm sure they're shaking in their boots right now.
Re: WhatsApp = 8 billion revenue (Score:1)
Out of interest, where does that revenue come from? As far as I can see, it's free to download, free to use and doesn't have ads in. So where does the other 8 billion come from?
Re: WhatsApp = 8 billion revenue (Score:5, Informative)
Have you been living under a rock this past decade?
The money comes from the monetization of your personal data - either the data you give em, they pry from you without your consent, or the metadata you spread around without even realizing it.
An American's personal data is worth worth between $2,000 and $3,000 [medium.com]. Residents of other countries, maybe more, probably often less, but certainly not nothing. Even assuming the average value of personal data across all FB users is worth, say, $100, multiply that by 2.8 billion users and... jackpot.
For FB of course, not for you. You're just the fucking cell in the matrix being dataraped for all you're worth.
Re: (Score:2)
This is not really correct. WhatsApp only shares metadata with Facebook, not conversation details (which are end-to-end encrypted), and that's much less useful for monetising, although it helps them build their connection network in Facebook.
Their money comes from the WhatsApp Business API, where businesses pay to use an API so they can automatically respond to customer messages. Spam is limited as customers have to contact a business first. In India they also have a WhatsApp payment system so no doubt skim
Re: (Score:2)
WhatsApp only shares metadata with Facebook, not conversation details (which are end-to-end encrypted)
Tell me, how do you know that for sure? Has anyone audited WhatsApp's protocol? How do you know it's not backdoored? How do you know exactly what they share with FB?
People keep repeating these "facts", totally disregarding the fact that those statements come from the companies themselves, And if there's something I really don't trust FB or WhatsApp or any other Big Data company with, it's issuing true statements on privacy and data sharing.
And I'll give you a clue why they're probably lying:
Their money comes from the WhatsApp Business API
8 billion / annu
Re: (Score:2)
Tell me, how do you know that for sure?
I don't, I just think it is more likely they are telling the truth, given their user base of 2 billion and having a lot of eyes on them, plus no unhappy employees have whistleblown about it. Cynicism is healthy though, and I personally use Signal where possible as I don't like the metadata sharing and think end-to-end encryption is too serious to be trusted to a company like Facebook.
8 billion / annum worth? That's a lot of business customers don't you think? I'm not buying it.
This is suspicious to me too. I wondered if there was some internal accounting going on where Facebook buys the metadata at r
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Not decided by DPC (Score:4, Informative)
Their initial proposed fine was in fact just €50m.
The DPC was not able to reach a agreement with other regulators within the EU on how to proceed, so the case was referred to the European Data Protection Board (EDPB), who came up with the much higher €225m figure.
Techcrunch [techcrunch.com]
I don't feel bad (Score:2)
for an industry that is ran by blood sucking marketers that only care about money and say they care about customers. I don't even care if this is lawful or not. Fine them all
Very informative (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Equal Under The Law (Score:5, Insightful)
On Tuesday, February 16, 2021, Parris Deshuante Evitt was sentenced to 46 months [justice.gov] in prison for cyberstalking a prior partner. for a period of approximately 2 years, the accused had been using email, Facebook and text messages to "control and threaten" a single victim.
Now, I'm not going to claim that there is a direct comparison between the actions of Evitt that ended up with him serving a nearly-4-year sentence and the actions of Whatsapp - it would be foolish to even attempt to argue that Whatsapp sends its users harassing and intimidating messages.
Yet in a way, I'd argue that what Whatsapp does is actually worse. Their practices are more subtle: as this article points out, they were clearly withholding information from their users concerning the use and disclosure of personal information. But they are also dangerous considering the scale involved... potentially millions of people impacted. We've come to learn that Facebook isn't a "social network", it's not even an "advertising platform", it is, instead, a mechanism for emotional and psychological manipulation on an industrial scale.
So if Mr Parris Deshaunte Evitt of Tulsa, Oklahoma, can acquire a 4-year custodial sentence for violating the on-line privacy of a single victim, what should the scale of charges be for a corporation, like WhatsApp/Facebook, that turned the privacy violation in to a profit-making industry and continued to exploit literally millions of people for years? Seriously, what is an appropriate remedy?
Because whatever might be appropriate, it sure as heck isn't something as insignificant as $267 million. That's chump change. That's "the cost of doing business". That's a rounding error on their quarterly shareholder report.
If the EU (or any other government agency, for that matter) is serious about on-line privacy, then, at minimum:-
1. The fines need to be several multiples of a year's gross income. Not profit. Income.
2. There need to be consequences for shareholders - i.e. no dividends or any other form of reward for shareholders for a minimum of 5 years.
3. There need to be consequences for senior executives - i.e. actual prison time for the CEO and/or COO, the person at the helm when the data collection was running.
4. There need to be consequences for middle managers who implemented or oversaw these practices and who didn't speak out. Like fines up of to 40% of average gross income over a 5-year period, for a 5-year period.
Put these sort of sanctions in place, and this sort of abusive crap will stop. Because if you don't, it will simply keep happening.
Apparently not (Score:2)
Data sharing is why... (Score:3)
Robotboy bought WhatsApp, Instagram, Oculus, and anything else that can siphon data from users. The collection, analysis, sale, and trade of user data is their business model.
Every unit was integrated into robotboy's enormous data-hoovering apparatus as soon as possible, and they each are little more than branded interfaces to it The only way to stop them from doing it is to break facebook up and ban the pieces from trading user data with one another.
Anyone else got reminded (Score:2)
Of the scene where Dr. Evil announces to the world that they're supposed to pay him a million dollars?
I can only imagine that the reaction at Whatsapp was similar to the laughter heard at the UN in the movie.
Re: (Score:2)
Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery