What’s really unhinged is the amount of resources invested into gaslighting Meta does. about.fb.com/news/2024/01/investing-in-privacy/
They even have a “Chief Privacy Officer”. They have brainwashed entire departments into believing that Meta actually cares about privacy, it’s so terrifying. I wonder if people working there realize that, or they have simply fell for the gaslighting.
NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Very true, and hopefully many other verdicts will follow, like "It’s not real consent if…this or that.
This dark pattern has started to spread everywhere already.
Evil_incarnate@lemm.ee 7 months ago
It’s not consent if there are fifty pages of legalese to read before you press accept.
disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 7 months ago
I’m a big fan of TOSDR and recommend everyone check it out. It’s a site dedicated to translating TOS and EULA into English by attorneys working pro-bono. It’s amazing what you’ll find in some of those agreements.
NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 7 months ago
I can hear PayPal giggling
lemmyvore@feddit.nl 6 months ago
There’s a core tenet in EU consumer protection law that if clauses aren’t clear enough to understand by laymen, they can be challenged.
Piece_Maker@feddit.uk 6 months ago
Curious how they expect this to work for people who aren’t even “paying” [with money or data] Meta users. Those people who never signed up for any of their services yet are still being tracked across websites via those social sharing buttons and the like. Are they supposed to pay Meta to not hoard their data from all the other websites, despite never setting foot on a Meta site?
NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 6 months ago
It is plain illegal what META is doing there. They just haven’t been dragged to court so far.
But with these buttons, the websites which includes them are offenders, too.
melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee 6 months ago
see I’d generally pay for privacy stuff
but I would need to pay. and theres no private way to do that.
NegativeInf@lemmy.world 7 months ago
“Nice data you got there. Be a shame if someone sold that for a premium”
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
I wish they’d do that in the US for the stupid TOS nonsense they pull. I’m guessing a lot of it wouldn’t hold up in court, but it’s unlikely to get challenged because an individual just doesn’t have the resources to do so, so it chills people into going along with it.
For example:
A lot of this is hidden behind dozens of pages of TOS that pretty much nobody reads. A general, “massive TOS isn’t real consent” law could do wonders to improve consumer protections. Specifically, this is what I’d like to see:
Or something along those lines. Consumer protections suck here, and I think this could solve a lot of the problems. Airing dirty laundry can solve a lot of problems.
upandatom@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Some good ideas here. Probably go with a word limit in your last bullet instead of the 5 minutes