Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday October 08 2016, @11:23AM   Printer-friendly
from the time-for-an-unlisted-number? dept.

The FCC has proposed rules that would protect the privacy of broadband subscribers, although they are less ambitious than originally envisioned, following complaints from telecoms:

A privacy proposal unveiled Thursday will require broadband providers such as Verizon and Comcast to get your permission before sharing with advertisers your phone or computer data. [...] The revised proposal, which will be put to an FCC vote on Oct. 27, says broadband providers do not have to get permission from customers to use "non-sensitive" information, such as names and addresses.

Also at The Wall Street Journal .

The Hill reports that the FCC [Federal Communications Commission] chairman authorized staffers to leak information before a vote on the expansion of the Lifeline subsidy program:

But the investigation by the agency's inspector general turned up "no evidence that the information was provided to the press in an attempt to unduly influence the outcome of the vote" and found Chairman Tom Wheeler had acted within his legal authority.

[...] Republican commissioners reached a deal with Democrat Mignon Clyburn before the committee's March open meeting that would have capped the program's budget. But the meeting was delayed multiple times as details of the deal leaked to the press. Clyburn ultimately voted for a version of the item without a cap, as proposed by Chairman Tom Wheeler. Critics have focused on a Politico report that included leaked details on the compromise and the proposed $2 billion budget cap. Later reports echo these details. They allege that the details may have been leaked to increase pressure on Clyburn, since many groups and lawmakers opposed the cap. Critics, on the other hand, say the Lifeline program is an example of a government program run amuck.

"The events surrounding the March 31st Commission vote adopting the Lifeline Order, while not unprecedented in their entirety, were certainly unusual," an investigator said in a memo released by the Republican majority of the Senate Commerce Committee. "Typically, commissioners do not engage in negotiations resulting in significant policy shifts in the final hours prior to a Commission vote." "Thus, while such activity is not improper or illegal, the rarity of the occurrence explains in large measure the interest, speculation and concern the matter has generated."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by bradley13 on Saturday October 08 2016, @12:04PM

    by bradley13 (3053) on Saturday October 08 2016, @12:04PM (#411733) Homepage Journal

    "non-sensitive" information, such as names and addresses...

    Given the wording "such as, I'd love to know what else is considered "non-sensitive". But my Google-fu is weak today, and I could not find the actual FCC proposal. Anyone have better luck?

    --
    Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 4, Informative) by NotSanguine on Saturday October 08 2016, @01:10PM

    by NotSanguine (285) <NotSanguineNO@SPAMSoylentNews.Org> on Saturday October 08 2016, @01:10PM (#411738) Homepage Journal

    The Washington Post article [washingtonpost.com] gives slightly more detail:

    The revised proposal, which will be put to an FCC vote on Oct. 27, says broadband providers do not have to get permission from customers to use “non-sensitive” information, such as names and addresses.

    This time around, customers still need to back broadband providers’ using and sharing a slew of their data, such as a phone’s physical location, websites browsed and apps used, and email content.

    Customers also must be told what types of information is kept and how it will be used.

    The fact sheet linked in TFS [fcc.gov] provides much more detail.

    HTHAL

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 08 2016, @01:34PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 08 2016, @01:34PM (#411743)

      And slowly, but gradually, we erode what is 'sensitive data'. It's death by a thousand cuts.
      Soon enough, dick/vag picks will no longer be sensitive data.

  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 08 2016, @06:42PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 08 2016, @06:42PM (#411813)

    i wonder how they would feel about the sensitivity of their address if people started going to their house to "talk" to them.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 09 2016, @05:47AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 09 2016, @05:47AM (#411954)

      You won't get past the gates on their communities.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 09 2016, @06:33AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 09 2016, @06:33AM (#411978)

        "Can't we just drone this guy?"