- Journal Archives
- Volume 17
- Volume 16
- Volume 15
- Volume 14
- Volume 13
- Volume 12
- Volume 11
- Volume 10
- Volume 9
- Volume 8
- Volume 7
- Volume 6
- Volume 5
- Volume 4
- Volume 3
- Volume 2
- Volume 1
Debate about technology encroaching on privacy is a common topic here on the JETLaw Blog. For recent examples, check out Brad Edmonson’s post about Google’s privacy red teams or Joel Slater’s post about tracking; if you dig further back, you’ll see that I have even written about it before.
As nice as it is to be able to back up my smartphone’s contacts through my Gmail account, this convenience comes with the trade-off that Google now knows everyone I know. Similarly, being tagged in Facebook photos provides an easy way to see other people’s pictures of me, yet it comes at the price of Facebook having a less-than-professional picture or two from my college days stored away on its servers. Indeed, most of the conveniences of the internet demand a privacy sacrifice .
Determining that privacy concerns outweighed convenience, Facebook has opted to disable its facial feature recognition software that made photo-tagging suggestions–at least in Europe and at least for now. This recognition software used data from old photos in which individuals were already tagged to suggest tagging similar-looking people in new photographs; in other words, Facebook has a rough idea of what you looked like and would suggest tagging you when someone who looked like you appeared in a picture. This feature had been the target of protest and probes in the past, and this suspension comes as the Data Commissioner of Ireland’s reviews Facebook’s compliance with a series of recommendations the DPC made last year (the headquarters of Facebook Europe is in Ireland).
Privacy and convenience, however, are not the only two forces in tension. Profitable websites (or websites aspiring to profitability) must also engage in a delicate balancing act between providing their users with an easy-to-use interface and sufficient privacy settings while still satisfying their customers through prominent advertisement placement and enough user data to target their ads effectively. With lackluster stock performance after a disastrous IPO, Facebook is surely feeling the weight of each side. If it encroaches too much on user privacy, Facebook risks losing users or incurring fines. But, if it does not satisfy its advertisers by providing information about its users, Facebook’s already criticized revenue stream will dry up even more.
Even as privacy concerns force Facebook disables its auto-tagging feature in Europe, the company has partnered with Datalogix to track off-line purchases in here in the United States. With some advocates warning that this partnership gathers far too much information about our private lives or that it may be in violation of a previous settlement between the FTC and Facebook, the push-pull between privacy and commerce/convenience continues to be as strong as ever.
– Hunter Branstetter
Recent Blog Posts
- Neiman Marcus Shoppers Suffer Financial Injuries! Possibly
- Facebook Gears up for Trademark Fight With Brazilian Competitor
- Draft Kings: A fantasy sports betting website valued close to $1 Billion
- Are Design Patents Really a Wise Investment Now?
- The Door Left Ajar: Navigating the Patent-Antitrust Paradox in Light of King Drug Co. v. GlaxoSmithKline
- Will Feds Preempt Tougher State Data Breach Laws?
Tagsadvertising antitrust Apple books career celebrities contracts copyright copyright infringement courts creative content criminal law entertainment Facebook FCC film/television financial First Amendment games Google government intellectual property internet JETLaw journalism lawsuits legislation media medicine Monday Morning JETLawg music NFL patents privacy progress publicity rights radio social networking sports Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) technology telecommunications trademarks Twitter U.S. Constitution