Literally, throw the book at him!
Robert Scoble titled a recent article “Scoble is an EU lawbreaker, blogger says“, the accusation the title speaks to his because Robert used a tool to record information that his contacts had shared with him.
Dennis Howlett claims “under EU law, it’s also illegal” based on Thomas Otter “[nailing] it” — if nailing means taking the back roads and maybe not even arriving at your destination. Neither make a a clear argument, legal or otherwise, of what Robert did wrong.
What other reason is there for me to share my email address with Robert in Facebook than the hope that he will record it in his address book and email me. Robert, you missed my 30th birthday in December!
9 Comments
I’m not sure it’s lawbreaking, but when I provide people with an email address via facebook, I expect them to use it for email, not scrape the address for use in another service that may or may not spam me.
IE - it’s fine for robert to look at my email (were i his friend) and use it. it’s not okay for him to give anyone else a look at my email address, especially another website. plaxo may not intend on using my email for evil, but some other sites would (c.f. myspace “viruses”)
Hi Adam, Thank you for the thought providing response.
I find “scrape” distracting, and I don’t find the techniques or technologies central to the issue. Techniques and technologies will continue to change the details, but don’t often affect the intentions and actions.
Robert recorded personal information people had chosen to share with him.
I have no doubt that Robert’s intent is to use my address for common sense purposes. If his actions of collecting and storing my personal information that I shared with him broke privacy laws than they need adjusting — it is my right to share my information.
You seem to suggest Facebook is providing some necessary protection, and that Robert violated the social contract with his “Facebook friends”. Robert’s actions seem directly inline with me sharing information and friending him on Facebook.
The implications of me friending Robert is that I trust him with this information. There is no confusion about whether I have given him access to this information, or what he can do with the information.
Likely there are reasonable legal guidelines (there should be) for the storage and distribution of personal information, but in the context of having chosen to share this information in this setting, what has Robert done wrong?
you’re right, the technology involved doesn’t matter, nor do the specific entities involved. but it’s hard to describe the situation in generic terms.
i gave my email addresses (specific ones, that aren’t available elsewhere on the internets) to facebook, on the understanding that they would be kept secret, except from a defined list of friends. If facebook had intended on making my email address available in a machine-readable format, I wouldn’t have given it to them. Likewise, if Plaxo, who I don’t trust, requested to be in the list of friends who can see my email address, I wouldn’t allow it.
Essentially, I told a secret to friend 1, who does a decent job of keeping it, telling it only to friend 2, who I’ve told friend 1 it’s okay to share it with. friend 2 tells friend 3, without asking my permission, or that of friend 1. friend 1 says that with that breach of trust, they can no longer be friends with friend 2 (or at least not the kind of friend that you tell secrets too).
It’s a little silly to try to legally regulate these sorts of trust relationships, but were I friends with anyone who shared my email with plaxo, i’d have been upset.
He broke the law - if you check the post I point to the specific provision. Jump to Thomas Otter’s site and you can see the whole 9 yards.
Dennis, sorry, I have reread your article again, and still don’t see a clear accusation. What is the specific provision?
The quote of Thomas Otter doesn’t include a clear accusation. You write “And under EU law, it’s also illegal.” What is it?
Thomas Otter starts off with the legal definition of personal information in European Union. Ok, following him so far… oh wait, he is now taking about the history and what would make a good foundation for a service that consumes personal data. Oh, wait again, now he seems to only talking about the “UK Act” — not sure what that is. Damn, he is now saying someone else “nails it”, Nick Carr! I’m lost.
I’m back to my original comment of, if nailing means taking the back roads and maybe not even arriving at your destination.
If you want to read a strong argument, a legal one at that, see Jason Schultz” Copyright, fair use and the struggle against online image misappropriation.
I’m genuinely interested if a strong (legal) argument is being made, and even if it hasn’t been I’m interested in it being clarified and made (if it exists).
LLoyd,
Glad you read the post, sorry if you couldn’t follow my line of reasoning. If you head back to the comments I have tried to respond to the majority of the comments.
I wasn’t writing the post to educate the world on EU privacy law.
But directive is a EU level legal instrument that is then transposed in national law. (hence the mention of UK law)
1. the facebook T&C set the basis for the relationship, not your personal definition of what being facebook friends allows or doesnt allow.
2. Testing an alpha product on behalf of plaxo wasnt what people gave him the data for.
As you are based in Canada, you may want to look at the position under Canadian privacy law yourself.
http://www.privcom.gc.ca/speech/2004/vs/vs_sp-d_040331_e.asp
It is very similar to the EU directive
http://www.privcom.gc.ca/information/02_05_d_08_e.asp
Regarding my email privacy, I’ve prefer that I give a company my email address directly. This contradicts the Plaxo situation where another individual provides the company with my email address without my consent. I don’t have the opportunity to decline to provide the address to the company.
It doesn’t have to be about email addresses — I suspect it’s more serious with providing third-party companies with physical mailing addresses of other individuals.
Fortunately (?!?) I’m not friends with Mr. Scoble.