When you use services like Facebook or Google, do you read their terms of use and privacy policies carefully?
I haven't read them. Well, I've read Facebook and Google's. But I haven't read most of the others. I went there because I wanted to use the service, so there's no way I'm going to read dozens of pages of terms and conditions.
The service provider must be well aware that customers will not read them, so it is highly questionable whether consent in this case is meaningful.
This situation is unfortunate for both service providers and users.
As one answer to this problem Kantara Initiative Of Information Sharing Work Group The specifications being considered are:Standard Information Sharing LabelThis is an attempt to express what is shared for the sake of convenience, and how, in a "standardized" form, like the labeling of food ingredients.
The Nutrition Facts Label for American foods looks like this:
(Source) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nutrition_facts_label
This way you can see at a glance, "Oh, there's 12g of fat in this food."
Information sharing standard labels are also displayed in the same way.
Information Sharing Standard Label
| Acquirer | Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/) |
|---|---|
| Acquired information | Status Update [take a look] |
| Source | Status updates from this web page |
| When acquired | When you press the "Submit" button |
| purpose of use | 1. To share the situation with friends. 2. To display customized advertising to you. |
| Expiration date | Until all original data and shares are deleted |
| Disclosure destination | Applications that use your and your friends' timelines and Facebook's OpenGraph API and have read_stream permission. |
| Additional conditions | |
| Master Agreement | April 2011, 4 https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms |
| Third-party evaluation score | Example Ratings 4.3/5 (2011/11/4) |
| Change of terms | With some exceptions, changes are made after 7 days of notice. |
(source)Joe Andrew “Standard Information Sharing Label” Translated and adapted on this site based on
This is still difficult, but at least it's much better than reading a lengthy contract.
He said he wants to make the design even cooler. (Recently, there was a fundraiser on Kickstarter to commission a designer, but it was canceled because it only raised about 50 yen... Are there any designers who would like to do a Japanese version for Loha?)
In addition, anyone can join the Kantara Initiative Information Sharing Working Group, where the actual work is being carried out. If you are interested, why not give it a try?
Trying to apply it in practice
Let's take an example of a certain company and apply it to practice.
Information Sharing Standard Label
| Acquirer | XXX Co., Ltd. |
|---|---|
| Acquired information |
[See it in action] |
| Source |
|
| When acquired |
|
| purpose of use |
|
| Expiration date | Until the member cancels their membership. However, personal information may still be used for the purposes listed in Purpose of Use 5 above even after the member cancels their membership. |
| Disclosure destination |
With regard to joint use for the above purposes, our company will be the entity responsible for managing personal data. |
| Additional conditions | |
| Master Agreement | Dated October 2011, 10 http://www.example.com/member/agreement/ |
| Third-party evaluation score | Example Ratings 4.3/5 (2011/11/4) |
| Change of terms | The revised terms will be posted on our website with at least one day's notice. After the notice period has elapsed, the revised terms will apply. |
Well, it's easier to understand than reading the contract. Also, looking at it like this, I think it's easier to see the problems. It depends on the person, but I would generally hesitate to agree to the above for the following reasons.
- Too many disclosures: The joint users are listed as "participating companies in the points program." I have heard that this company does not actually share information before k-anonymization, but according to the regulations, raw data can be shared. If that is the case, there are too many recipients. Also, if it is considered as a standard label, I think that the main company names and the total number of companies should be listed. As of June 2012, 6, it appears that it is available at 20 brands and 134 stores.
- The number of disclosure destinations is increasing: The joint users are "points program participating companies." This is expected to increase in the future. Even if there are companies among them that I do not want to be disclosed, there is a possibility that they will be disclosed without my knowledge.
- Too much information revealed: Since I am a shared user, all of my information may be disclosed. Also, my actions at multiple companies may be tracked, and lifestyle analysis may be used to create a profile of me that I may not want, which may then be shared among shared users. It may be possible to control this by creating multiple ▽ cards, but I'm not sure. It would be a little reassuring if it was explicitly stated what is provided...
- Change of terms: The notice period for changes to the terms is one day, and the notice is posted on the company's website (← I probably won't go there, so I won't know), and the contents of the changed terms will apply. Google, which I will talk about later, can make changes at any time, but any changes that are detrimental to the user require explicit consent.
- No expiration date: It is limited to responding to inquiries, but it seems that the information will never be deleted. I think it should be deleted after a certain period of time. For example, credit information agencies for credit cards set the period to 18 months.
Google Example
Next, let's look at an example from Google, which is famous for being easy to understand. I've paraphrased Google's privacy policy based on my own understanding. Does it make it any easier to understand?
Information Sharing Standard Label
| Acquirer | Google Inc. |
|---|---|
| Acquired information |
|
| Source |
|
| When acquired |
|
| purpose of use |
|
| Expiration date | Until you delete it, which we will do free of charge, unless it would require a disproportionate technical effort (such as developing new systems or fundamentally modifying existing methods), would jeopardize the privacy of others, or would be extremely impractical (such as requests for information on backup tapes). |
| Disclosure destination |
|
| Additional conditions |
|
| Master Agreement | Dated October 2011, 10 http://www.example.com/member/agreement/ |
| Third-party evaluation score | Example Ratings 4.3/5 (2011/11/4) |
| Change of terms | From time to time, but we will not make any changes that reduce your rights unless we obtain your consent. |
What do you think? It's a bit tricky because the original is very easy to understand, but I think it's great that it makes it easier to make side-by-side comparisons.
Future tasks
When we apply this to real-life examples, we can see various issues. For example, in the case of Google, the problem of the so-called "As if owner provision" that is included in the terms of use rather than the privacy policy is not clear. The "As if owner" provision allows Google to act as if it were the owner of content uploaded by users. Here is a quote:
Some parts of the Service allow users to submit content. You retain any intellectual property rights you may have in that content - what's yours is still yours.
When you upload or otherwise provide content to a Service, you grant Google (and third parties working with Google) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as derivative works resulting from Google's translation, conversion, or other changes to make your content work better with the Service), transmit, publish, publicly perform, publicly display, and distribute that content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving the Service and developing new ones. This license continues even if you stop using the Service (for example, a business listing you added to Google Maps). Some Services may provide you with a way to access and remove content you have provided to that Service. In addition, some Services have rules or settings that narrow the scope of Google's use of content provided to that Service. Make sure you have the necessary rights to grant this license to Google for the content you provide to the Service.
You can find more information about how Google uses and stores content in the Google Privacy Policy or additional terms for specific Services. If you submit feedback or suggestions about the Services, Google may use that feedback or suggestions without any obligation to you. (Source:http://www.google.com/intl/ja/policies/terms/)
1 Response to "Meaningful Consent and Information Sharing Standard Label"