Privacy policies are full of jargon and are designed to reduce organisations' liability rather than to help people understand what their personal data might be used for, the UK's privacy watchdog has said. The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has published guidelines on what privacy policies should look like and is …
Watchdog? Fig leaf more like
I've really lost interest in what this most toothless of UK watchdogs has to say since their near total capitulation on the phorm issue. Perhaps if they rolled they sleeves up and did something useful rather than endlessly pontificating, they might get taken seriously. There's more sense talked on privacy on the El Reg comments than by Thomas and his chimps tea party.
Paris, cos she's marginally less pointless than the ICO.
Shot self in foot
When world + dog started suing for any infraction of legislation that they could find, they pretty much ensured that enterprises had to start becoming more defensive and less accessible.
I'm all for a GPL-style legislation system, but expect a large amount of resistance from the ambulance chasers.
Just like any set of T's&C's etc full of legal rubbish to protect the seller and not the consumer.
Well you signed for it mate its your coat now
"Privacy policies are full of jargon and are designed to reduce organisations' liability"
Stating the bleeding obvious with that one, thats what happens when you legislate people who can afford lawyers will always spin it in the best possible way for themselves
"Privacy policies are ... designed to reduce organisations' liability rather than to help people understand..."
You're kidding, right?
Where's the "Ministry of the Bleedin' Obvious" icon when you need it?
ICO and Phonepayplus and Premium Rate Fraud
This year Phonepayplus admitted there had been a 40% year on year rise in complaints from the public claiming they had received reverse billed premium rate sms texts that they insisted they had not sgned up for.
Phonepayplus admitted the major cause for this rise in complaints was the 'black market' trading within the 'industry' of third party data lists of mobile phone numbers. They also admitted that these lists had been collected and sold by price comparison sites and retailers that had no connection with Premium Rate Services.
If Phonepayplus were aware of this in the cases they 'investigated' how many did they refer to the ICO. How many of these 'companies' have the ICO investigated and prosecuted using the Data Protection Act?
Millions of pounds stolen from mobile phone accounts and not one prosecution.
GPL style what? GPL is one of the most legalistic and obnoxiously long EULAs out there. That would hardly be an improvement.
- Review Reg man looks through a Glass, darkly: Google's toy ploy or killer tech specs?
- MEN WANTED to satisfy town full of yearning BRAZILIAN HOTNESS
- +Comment 'Stop dissing Google or quit': OK, I quit, says Code Club co-founder
- Nokia: Read our Maps, Samsung – we're HERE for the Gear
- Apple tried to get a ban on Galaxy, judge said: NO, NO, NO