decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
P&G, Walmart, Over reaction? | 751 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
P&G, Walmart, Over reaction?
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 06:28 PM EDT
Well, actually the law is the correct solution here, as
there is a big inbalance between customer and
merchant/service provider. Hence you cannot assume that a
single customer can negotiate with the other party over
contract details.

Practically, you just need to forbid person-linkable data
without consent, e.g. a person orders something, so in your
order form they consent to your usage of the data for order
processing.

Basically turn the situation 180° degree, instead of the
customer fighting to control the usage his data, the company
that wants to use it has to prove that it's allowed so, e.g.
the normal reason being that the person allowed for the data
collection, with the provision that this permission can be
withdrawn at any time, without affecting any other
provisions of a contract. Add to this some specific reasons
as "needed to fulfill legal requirements by law", and you've
got a situation companies cannot just steal your data.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Huh?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 05 2012 @ 03:27 PM EDT
I'm not at all comfortable with your equation to "merchants have been
tracking us for decades".

The old style tracking was specific to your interaction with said merchants.
You knew who was tracking, and, as noted, if you didn't like it you could sever
the relationship.

Tracking in the modern sense is not limited to your relationship with any
particular merchant or industry. It tracks everything you do online, even if
you have no valid business or relationship with the tracker. Its data is
further collected and indexed and resold to anyone who pays a fee, without you
having any way to know just what was used or how or by whom.

Yes, we have been tracked. But only in recent years has that tracking become so
pervasive that you no longer have any way to monitor it, and often, you aren't
even notified that its going on. Not the same at all.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )