Techdirt Podcast Episode 41: Privacy Policies Have Nothing To Do With Privacy

from the let's-get-rid-of-them dept

Tue, Sep 8th 2015 12:40pm — Leigh Beadon

Privacy policies are ubiquitous online, and often required by law, but what are they really for? People don't read them, and when they do, they have a tendency to misunderstand them -- such as with the recent flare-up over poorly-contextualized changes to Spotify's policy. Plus, there's a built-in incentive for companies to write their policies as broadly as possible to avoid accidentally violating them, further stripping them of all purpose. This week, we discuss a simple question: are privacy policies an altogether stupid idea?

Follow the Techdirt Podcast on Soundcloud, subscribe via iTunes, or grab the RSS feed. You can also keep up with all the latest episodes right here on Techdirt.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: podcast, privacy, privacy policy
Companies: spotify

7 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 8 Sep 2015 @ 1:02pm

These days privacy policies literally mean "Here's how we're going to invade your-Privacy Policy - to get our asses legally covered".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mason Wheeler (profile), 8 Sep 2015 @ 1:54pm

I find the "Nike shoes ad" thing--and many very similar incarnations of targeted advertising, such as books and movies--particularly stupid. If I just bought some goods that will last for several years, pretty much by definition I'm not going to need any more for several years, so therefore I should be one of the lowest-priority targets for further advertising! How do advertisers not get this?

Between the obvious stupidity inherent in so much of it, the "creepy factor," and the poor psychological signaling that it conveys, it's no wonder that essentially everyone hates targeted ads. And the name hardly helps either; who wants to be a target?

WRT the concept of private information getting accidentally released due to a bug, have a look at this account of exactly that happening to a programmer just last month. A bug caused this guy who was trying to upload some code to a private GitHub repository to a public repo instead, and it contained a security key. A big mess ensued very quickly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 Sep 2015 @ 5:58pm

You can't trust a company either way if they give the control to users , they'll use legalese to skirt around it .. and since the avg user doesn't really know how to protect their privacy Companies will take advantage completely systematically and without remorse, as they do now .
What's needed is a set of tools for available for every user of all technical skill levels and help implementing those tools into everyday life.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 Sep 2015 @ 6:10pm

At the 12 min mark because your nike ad placement is now connected to your unique identifier , If you purchase for a higher price your more likely to get a higher price even if they are cheaper someplace else because they track you and your price range shopping.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
IP Lawyer, 9 Sep 2015 @ 7:41am

I write privacy policies for a living
I've written many.

The documents exist, 100%, to protect the company publishing them. I cannot even conceive of a mindset that thinks these documents serve any other purpose.

They are, in many instances (for instance, California Civil Code Section 1798.83) required by law, and, in many other instances, required by the realities of civil litigation in this country.

The document serves one purpose, and one purpose alone:
To explain to users the uses of their data, put them on notice, and describe under what circumstances users may or may not sue the service for use or misuse of data.

No more, no less.

Granted, I haven't listened to the podcast - but "are privacy policies altogether a stupid idea" is a useless question. It is a disclaimer, required by law.

While we are in the process of throwing out privacy policies, lets get rid of user manuals and warning labels too, shall we? It's just as reasonable a proposition.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike Masnick (profile), 9 Sep 2015 @ 11:12am
  
  Re: I write privacy policies for a living
  Granted, I haven't listened to the podcast
  
  That seems rather obvious, given that we discuss every point you raise in the podcast...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - IP Lawyer, 9 Sep 2015 @ 3:30pm
    
    Re: Re: I write privacy policies for a living
    Touche, salesman.
    
    It's on the list to listen to on the train...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]