Your Facebook Info Could be Protected Under California Proposal

By Dennis Romero Tue., May 31 2011 at 8:07 AM

eigi

If you don't want Facebook to share your private information, a bill that would grant that wish hits the California Senate this week for a vote.

But it will be an uphill battle. Sen. Ellen Corbett's SB 242 needs five votes for passage. It was already rejected and was granted reconsideration in the Senate, according to California News Service. Facebook, Google and other Silicon Valley giants are lobbying against it.

It' called the Social Networking Privacy Act, and here's what it would do:

... Prohibit a social networking Internet Web site, as defined, from displaying to the public or other registered users any information about a registered user of that Internet Web site, other than the user's name and city of residence, without the express agreement of the user.

It would also ...

... require a social networking Internet Web site to establish a process for new users to set their privacy settings as part of the registration process that explains privacy options in plain language, and to make privacy settings available in an easy-to-use format.

Sounds good, huh? But the social networking giants aren't having it. Your info = money for marketing and advertising. Knowing not just that you exist, but that you live in a certain zip code, are a certain age, went to a certain college, is gold.

Corbett tells California News Service:

This really is something the citizens of California are clamoring for; more privacy and respect for their private information. And I think this is the wave of the future.

Maybe you should, er, start a Facebook page to support it.

[@dennisjromero/djromero@laweekly.com]

Tags:

California Senate, Facebook, privacy, privacy law, Senate, social media, social networking, Twitter

We Recommend

Cat got your tongue?

It appears that the truth hit a nerve with Mr. Noyes. He obviously can't respond so it seems that spying and astroturfing were the primary reasons behind why this bill was killed. Care to comment Andrew, Dennis?

Noyes

Lawmakers rejected Senator Ellen Corbett’s bill on Friday because it was a step in the wrong direction for California’s growing Internet industry at a time when the state's economy can least afford it. Senator Corbett is arguing for unnecessary regulations that ignore the extraordinary lengths that companies like ours go to in order to protect individuals' privacy and give them the tools to determine for themselves how much information they wish to share online. -- Andrew Noyes, Facebook

Looking for the Truth

Lawmakers rejected the bill because it was a step in the wrong direction for the government’s interest in having channels to collect information on its citizens and foreigners. The "bubble-like" valuations of Facebook, LinkedIn and other social networking sites reflect the true nature of the organizations. Users are far more valuable to the government as sources of information than they are to shareholders on an average revenue per user basis. I'm not saying that tremendous revenue and profit opportunities don't exist, but I am saying that these are not the so called "crown jewels" of the company, user information and government’s interest in this data is. The government is also interested in using Facebook and other social media forums to Astroturf. That means allowing one person to pose as numerous profiles, all with made up back stories and personas. These fake profiles can be used to gather information, troll, steer conversations away from the real issues, etc. Furthermore, this is just the tip of the iceberg. This is what I understand as a normal citizen. I am sure Andrew is privy to much information that I am not. He obviously can not speak to the fact that Facebook most likely has been issued a National Security Letter (NSL), which requires them to hand over any information requested by the government. They are not allowed to tell you if they are supplying your information without breaking the law with respect to the NSL. All of the large phone carriers, some libraries, most likely Facebook and other social media sites, Amazon, etc have all been issued NSLs. In summary, this bill may or may not have had any impact on the nature of privacy, but saying that it was shut down for economic reasons is BS and obviously Facebook’s PR spin.