[pedalpete]

There are two sides to the 'value' equation here. The telecoms can now sell your data, but that also means that somebody needs to be buying it on the other end.

This campaign does a great job of calling out Senators who sold out their voters.

I'd like to see us also call out the companies that buy the data from the telecoms. Just because it is legal, doesn't mean it is right. I'm not sure how one would track down who purchased the data, but if a billboard said "X bought your data without your consent", would shaming the purchaser also be a possibility?

[fiiv]

You are assuming that this will be easy to find.

The most obvious methods that comes to mind:

Isolate the purchase to some kind of shell company or chain of shell companies. The sale can go through them and end up in my hands.

Also possible that we will see the rise of a data broker, who buys the data and sells it to clients but keeps them anonymous.

[FullMtlAlcoholc]

> Also possible that we will see the rise of a data broker, w

That people aren't aware that the digitization this is and has been a very lucrative profession for at least 20 years is testament to how, shalll we say, shadowy they are :)

Besides the moral implications, being a data broker sounds like a cool, cyberpunk-esque gig.

[passiveincomelg]

The most obvious method is employees in selling or buying companies leaking this information.

[Melk]

Politicians are our representatives, not corporations. If you want to shame people for not doing the right thing you would need to become a priest.

[passiveincomelg]

It's not about shaming corporations. It's about telling people which companies to boycott.

[txmx2000]

No they can't. It Has been illegal for nearly a century and it id still is illegal to sell telecommunication customers' data. Congress just reversed the FCC rules from October. It has to do with an government agency overstepping their authority and nothing to do with privacy.

Anybody who says otherwise is lying or ignorant of the law regarding CPNI.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2015-title47-vol3/pdf/CFR-...

[SwellJoe]

Either you're misunderstanding the impact of the change, or the ACLU, the EFF, and a number of reputable news organizations are misunderstanding it.

ACLU: https://www.aclu.org/news/aclu-comment-congressional-move-al...

EFF: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/five-creepy-things-you...

The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/28/internet-...

[FullMtlAlcoholc]

How many bold faced lies can you fit into 3 sentences?

> It has to do with an government agency overstepping their authority

I've seen this horseshit repeated ad naseum.The U.S. Telecommunications Act of 1996 granted the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) authority to regulate how customer proprietary network information (CPNI) can be used and to enforce related consumer information privacy provisions. In 2015, Broadband Internet Service Providers were reclassified as telecommunications companies, meaning that these rules will apply to them. They are not an information service. Google is an information service. They provide me with an internet connection, they do not provide me with any content at all and no consumer expects that from them.

Do you understand that an Act has to be passed by both Houses of Congress and signed by the president? I don't know how much more legitimate authority can get when you are granted authority by our elected representatives.

> and nothing to do with privacy.

From the very first sentence of the FCC's 2007 REPORT AND ORDER AND FURTHER NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING [0]

"In this Order, the Commission responds to the practice of “pretexting” by strengthening our rules to protect the privacy of customer proprietary network information (CPNI)"

>It Has been illegal for nearly a century and it id still is illegal to sell telecommunication customers' data.

FALSE

AGAIN, from the FCC's 2007 REPORT AND ORDER AND FURTHER NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING [0]

"We modify our rules to require telecommunications carriers to obtain opt-in consent from a customer before disclosing that customer’s CPNI to a carrier’s joint venture partner or independent contractor for the purpose of marketing communications-related services to that customer.117 While we realize that this is a change in Commission policy, we find that new circumstances force us to reassess our existing regulations. As we have found previously, the Commission has a substantial interest in protecting customer privacy."

"Based on this and in light of new privacy concerns, we now find that an opt-in framework for the sharing of CPNI with joint venture partners and independent contractors for the purposes of marketing communications-related services to a customer both directly advances our interest in protecting customer privacy and is narrowly tailored to achieve our goal of privacy protection"

"Joint Venture and Independent Contractor Use of CPNI. We modify our rules to require carriers to obtain opt-in consent from a customer before disclosing a customer’s CPNI to a carrier’s joint venture partners or independent contractors for the purposes of marketing communicationsrelated services to that customer."

> https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2015-title47-vol3/pdf/CFR-...

So do you think you can link to an obtuse document written in legalese, hoping that no one will read it? These are the rules from 2015...8 years after the FCC changed how telcos may use your CPNI

Just reading the rest of your comment history, do you do this for profit or for pleasure?

[0]: https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-22A1.pd...

[Ajedi32]

That link appears to be to an FCC regulation (https://www.fcc.gov/general/rules-regulations-title-47), not a law. Are you certain the rules in that document would not be affected by this recent legislation?