U.S. Supreme Court rebuffs Facebook appeal in user tracking lawsuit

Re:U.S. Supreme Court rebuffs Facebook appeal in user tracki... by Invictus0 on Monday March 22, 2021 @09:40PM (#26549964)

Consider this though: you walk into a casino and start gambling, and the casino hires a third party company to watch its security cameras. No one seems to have any issue with that arrangement; is this really so different? I think the key to understanding the situation is that the establishment makes the rules; the establishment put the like button there.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. Supreme Court rebuffs Facebook appeal in user tracki... by geoduck14 on Monday March 22, 2021 @09:59PM (#26550112)

This calls out a really interesting extrapolation of privacy laws that have existed for many years.

For a long time, I (as a human) have permission to watch people around me.

I also have the legal right to record what is happening around me (many states only require one people to be aware of recording activities)

I also have the legal right to record YOU, assuming we are in a location where I can lawfully stand. And I can tell other people what I saw.

Now, I can put a camera somewhere, record EVERYONE, track people, and sell that tracking information.

All because we didn't anticipate the computing potential to record and process EVERYTHING.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. Supreme Court rebuffs Facebook appeal in user tracki... by ehnto on Tuesday March 23, 2021 @01:00AM (#26551304)

So do we consider the web and websites to be public places or private places, and does out change depending on who runs the site?

Is a government website a private setting? Is a personal blog private or public?

I wonder if other countries have already explored this and written some law about it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. Supreme Court rebuffs Facebook appeal in user tracki... by codecutter on Tuesday March 23, 2021 @01:37AM (#26551478)

Any website that is not behind a pay wall or does not require me to login to read the content, I would consider it to be a public site.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. Supreme Court rebuffs Facebook appeal in user tracki... by RHSeeger on Tuesday March 23, 2021 @10:23AM (#26555378)

I think you are using "public" differently here than a lot of people would. A public bathroom is still "public" in that it's available to anyone and doesn't require specific information about you to use. However, most people would still consider it a private place, and expect their privacy to be respected while using it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. Supreme Court rebuffs Facebook appeal in user tracki... by ehnto on Tuesday March 23, 2021 @12:56AM (#26551286)

That's a good distinction. If the casino sent someone to listen at an unaffiliated restaurant that is different to the casino having agents in it's own premises.

[ Parent | on HN ]