[tylerl]

Following your metaphor, what about email between Bob and Carol which mentions Alice explicitly, using her name and email address? Should Alice be entitled to a copy of that private message between Bob and Carol?

Does information become yours if it is about you, even if you aren't a participant in it's creation or distribution?

It's easy to argue that advertising distribution lists are private conversations between FB and advertisers, and hard to argue that they're not. Saying I'm entitled to a copy of that conversation if I'm mentioned becomes a hard position to take.

[kurthr]

No, because you weren’t party to the conversation. This seems like a pretty rugged rather than slippery slope.

[Ajedi32]

So to be clear, you agree that advertising distribution lists shouldn't be included in the takeout request? GP's point was that you're not a party to the conversation in that situation either.

[mcny]

I don’t think I’m asking for much here. If I have access to it on Facebook on my profile, in my message box, or somehow associated with my profile, it should be a part of my takeout is all I’m saying. How is this controversial?

[basch]

Does you being tagged in a photo make it your photo? Or do just want the metadata, that says "you were tagged in person x's photo number #2345345?

[mcny]

I don’t claim exclusive rights but that photo should be a part of my takeout.

[edoceo]

Obviously not. The cases are where parties are explicitly included: my timeline, tagged in photos, etc. Mention someone, w/o direct linkage doesn't include that communique in their dataset.

[basch]

The posted story is about exporting the list of parties who UPLOADED your contact info to facebook. An advertiser who bought a list, and presses import.