The House Agrees: ISPs Can Sell Your Data Without Permission

[Lucian Armasu]

The U.S. House voted to eliminate the FCC's new broadband privacy protections, just as the Senate did last week. The bill should arrive on President Trump's desk soon, and that may be the last chance to stop it.

The House Agrees: ISPs Can Sell Your Data Without Permission : Read more

 

[Joe Black]

Business at all cost... The Trump way.

 

[clonazepam]

My browsing history might lead to computer parts covered with beautiful women instead of RGBs.

 

[ddpruitt]

There's a goFundMe page to buy the internet history of all those that voted yes on the bill haven't verified
but it seems to be getting traction

 

[Indirectllama]

I think its time TH does another article on VPN services and their cost and comparison.

 

[dstarr3]

I pledge allegiance to the CEO of the United States of Americorp, and to the corporation for which it stands. One nation, under surveillance, uninsurable, with wealth and education for none.

 

[why_wolf]

Yeah I went and singed up with NordVPN. Seems to work alright so far, though from my 100/10 connection it slows me down to around a 20-30/10 connection. Enough for everyday web browsing and the like. Though Netflix throws up problems which I assume is a combination of them closing connections with VPNs because of the media companies demands about out of region piracy and simply to many Nord users trying to connect to Netflix at once.

 

[tigz1218]

I'm Seth be VPN industry will be happy about this.

In fact, at first I was very angry about this legislation. However, after a lot of thought they do have a point - this let's Google have an unfair advantage since they can collect data, burn ISPs.

In usual government fashion, they identified the problem, but presented the wrong solution. If they want to keep data private then NO Company should be able sell your data. That would be an even playing field, but will never happen.

 

[tigz1218]

Wish I could of edit my comment- should say "I'm sure the VPN industry..." my iPhone did a stealth autocorrect.

 

[DerpDerp1234]

People are all up in arms over this, but companies have been selling your data for decades, but for ISP's to do it, THAT'S OVER THE LINE. Hypocrites.
You're on the internet, they are tracking you as we speak.

 

[TJ Hooker]

In fact, at first I was very angry about this legislation. However, after a lot of thought they do have a point - this let's Google have an unfair advantage since they can collect data, burn ISPs.

Google (the search engine and related services) doesn't compete with ISPs, I don't see how Google being able to collect data "burns ISPs".

Also, Google:
a) has no (monetary) cost to use
b) has alternatives you could use instead
c) is not mandatory in order to access the broader advantages of the internet which most of us would find difficult or impossible to do without

You already pay your ISP, and there are few if any alternatives when it comes to ISPs. This is basically ISPs wanting to have their cake and eat it too, knowing that there's probably nothing you can do about it if you don't like it.

 

[TJ Hooker]

People are all up in arms over this, but companies have been selling your data for decades, but for ISP's to do it, THAT'S OVER THE LINE. Hypocrites.
You're on the internet, they are tracking you as we speak.

First off, as I mentioned, there's a difference between free services that you choose to use (and have alternatives to) collecting your data vs an ISP doing it.

Secondly, there's a difference between a company being able to track your browsing, and them being able to sell that information freely.

 

[DerpDerp1234]

People are all up in arms over this, but companies have been selling your data for decades, but for ISP's to do it, THAT'S OVER THE LINE. Hypocrites.
You're on the internet, they are tracking you as we speak.

First off, as I mentioned, there's a difference between free services that you choose to use (and have alternatives to) collecting your data vs an ISP doing it.

Secondly, there's a difference between a company being able to track your browsing, and them being able to sell that information freely.

"free"... yeah... sure...

 

[dark_lord69]

Talk about polarized!
Almost ALL republicans voted to let ISP's sell your data!

Maybe you should think about that the next time you vote for a Republican president.
...many of you out there are ignorantly republican.

Just watch them voting and you'll learn which group is for the people and which group is for the corporations and rich.

 

[dstarr3]

If you really want to see who political parties support, just look at who benefits from their legislature. And I tell ya, no actual citizen benefits from this. The only ones that benefit from this are corporations. It's almost as if...

 

[Aspiring techie]

If Toms wants to play fair politically, at least tell us why the Republicans though it was best to repeal these protections. As is you are showing us only one side to a very two sided story.

 

[why_wolf]

If Toms wants to play fair politically, at least tell us why the Republicans though it was best to repeal these protections. As is you are showing us only one side to a very two sided story.

They thought it was best because lobbyist told them to. It's really that simple.

 

[Aspiring techie]

If Toms wants to play fair politically, at least tell us why the Republicans though it was best to repeal these protections. As is you are showing us only one side to a very two sided story.

They thought it was best because lobbyist told them to. It's really that simple.

They did it for two reasons.
1. The ISPs have to play by stricter rules than companies such as Google and Facebook. Repealing these regulations makes for a more standard regulation across the board.
2. Republicans want to keep the government out of business's hair as much as possible. They believe that repealing these regulations represent big government and overreach of power.

 

[Daekar3]

Well, more of the expected slanted reporting. It's not like the world is all of a sudden going to change, it's just going to be like it was shortly before the election. The only reason they passed this at the last minute was because they knew it was improper and would need to be repealed. Why do you think the entire press corps had their message ready to plaster everywhere?

The FCC should never have been regulating this. This would be the job of the FTC.

You can opt out now, just like you could before.

Really, this is small potatoes. The legislation you should be pushing for would be FAR more reaching in protecting consumer privacy.

 

[DerpDerp1234]

Well, more of the expected slanted reporting. It's not like the world is all of a sudden going to change, it's just going to be like it was shortly before the election. The only reason they passed this at the last minute was because they knew it was improper and would need to be repealed. Why do you think the entire press corps had their message ready to plaster everywhere?

The FCC should never have been regulating this. This would be the job of the FTC.

You can opt out now, just like you could before.

Really, this is small potatoes. The legislation you should be pushing for would be FAR more reaching in protecting consumer privacy.

Someone that gets it, wow! They are basically making a mountain out of a mole hill, the modern 'journalists' in a nut shell.

 

[Aspiring techie]

Well, more of the expected slanted reporting. It's not like the world is all of a sudden going to change, it's just going to be like it was shortly before the election. The only reason they passed this at the last minute was because they knew it was improper and would need to be repealed. Why do you think the entire press corps had their message ready to plaster everywhere?

The FCC should never have been regulating this. This would be the job of the FTC.

You can opt out now, just like you could before.

Really, this is small potatoes. The legislation you should be pushing for would be FAR more reaching in protecting consumer privacy.

Someone that gets it, wow! They are basically making a mountain out of a mole hill, the modern 'journalists' in a nut shell.

And what a molehill. ISPs can only collect a fraction of the data Google and Facebook collect. Google and Facebook make loads of money through advertising based on the data. ISPs can't leverage the data nearly as much as those companies, so it seems ridiculous that they aren't subject to the same freedom Google and Facebook are.

 

[why_wolf]

Well, more of the expected slanted reporting. It's not like the world is all of a sudden going to change, it's just going to be like it was shortly before the election. The only reason they passed this at the last minute was because they knew it was improper and would need to be repealed. Why do you think the entire press corps had their message ready to plaster everywhere?

The FCC should never have been regulating this. This would be the job of the FTC.

You can opt out now, just like you could before.

Really, this is small potatoes. The legislation you should be pushing for would be FAR more reaching in protecting consumer privacy.

Someone that gets it, wow! They are basically making a mountain out of a mole hill, the modern 'journalists' in a nut shell.

And what a molehill. ISPs can only collect a fraction of the data Google and Facebook collect. Google and Facebook make loads of money through advertising based on the data. ISPs can't leverage the data nearly as much as those companies, so it seems ridiculous that they aren't subject to the same freedom Google and Facebook are.

Um ISPs can collect 100% of the information because they are gatekeepers. Google and Facebook can only collect info from sites they own or are utilized through. Which you can avoid by simply not using them or employing add-ons like Adblock and Ghostry to greatly reduce what they can collect. Not to mention that Google and Facebook are free and pay for themselves with ads while I have to shovel out hard cash for an ISP connection and will receive zero benefit from the ISP now selling my data.

The only effective tool to avoid ISP collection is to use a VPN, for which you'll have to pay for.

As for the FTC, no they can't. ISP are labeled as common carries over which the FTC has no authority. The FCC rules would have put in place a required opt-in system, which effectively replaced the previous FTC rule that no longer applied. Which wasn't even a rule but a meaningless, toothless, guideline that suggests opt-in are best but feel free do opt-out instead.

Of course this the end game of the ISPs to place themselves in a regulatory grey zone where no one has authority over them and they can get away with anything. Since they are regional monopolies they can use and abuse their customers (which is why they are constantly rated as the worst customer service companies in the country) and have zero fear of any meaningful financial blow back.

 

[hoofhearted]

It's a molehill until their database gets breached and you have to fight an identity thief. Republicans flubbed healthcare last week and now this. Great start.

 

[wiyosaya]

According to this article - https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170327/09244537008/just-use-vpn-isnt-real-solution-to-gops-decision-to-kill-broadband-privacy-protections.shtml - even on a VPN, your data will pop out somewhere on another ISP and that ISP will be free to sell that data, too.

 

[wiyosaya]

Well, more of the expected slanted reporting. It's not like the world is all of a sudden going to change, it's just going to be like it was shortly before the election. The only reason they passed this at the last minute was because they knew it was improper and would need to be repealed. Why do you think the entire press corps had their message ready to plaster everywhere?

The FCC should never have been regulating this. This would be the job of the FTC.

You can opt out now, just like you could before.

Really, this is small potatoes. The legislation you should be pushing for would be FAR more reaching in protecting consumer privacy.

Someone that gets it, wow! They are basically making a mountain out of a mole hill, the modern 'journalists' in a nut shell.

And what a molehill. ISPs can only collect a fraction of the data Google and Facebook collect. Google and Facebook make loads of money through advertising based on the data. ISPs can't leverage the data nearly as much as those companies, so it seems ridiculous that they aren't subject to the same freedom Google and Facebook are.

Um ISPs can collect 100% of the information because they are gatekeepers. Google and Facebook can only collect info from sites they own or are utilized through. Which you can avoid by simply not using them or employing add-ons like Adblock and Ghostry to greatly reduce what they can collect. Not to mention that Google and Facebook are free and pay for themselves with ads while I have to shovel out hard cash for an ISP connection and will receive zero benefit from the ISP now selling my data.

The only effective tool to avoid ISP collection is to use a VPN, for which you'll have to pay for.

As for the FTC, no they can't. ISP are labeled as common carries over which the FTC has no authority. The FCC rules would have put in place a required opt-in system, which effectively replaced the previous FTC rule that no longer applied. Which wasn't even a rule but a meaningless, toothless, guideline that suggests opt-in are best but feel free do opt-out instead.

Of course this the end game of the ISPs to place themselves in a regulatory grey zone where no one has authority over them and they can get away with anything. Since they are regional monopolies they can use and abuse their customers (which is why they are constantly rated as the worst customer service companies in the country) and have zero fear of any meaningful financial blow back.

Ah, someone who has thought this through without listening to the political rhetoric and REALLY gets it.