Reply to post: @Doctor SyntaxRe: 'It's not clear whether he also has a FB account or whether he's a non-account'

Chap asks Facebook for data on his web activity, Facebook says no, now watchdog's on the case

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

@Doctor SyntaxRe: 'It's not clear whether he also has a FB account or whether he's a non-account'

Sorry but from a technical aspect, there is no defense.

Regardless of your status as a member or not, FB captures and performs work on the data in order to build a profile. Its not until the later stages that they are able to match this information against a FB user.

Think of it this way.

You use Dr. Syntax here.

You may have your favorite fetish site where you go by igor

Your real name may be Christopher Robbins and on FB you go by the ailas Chris McDougal.

(I don't know I'm just making this example up ...)

So even if they can't match Christopher Robbins to a FB user, there is still data on you and it has value.

What they do with it is a mystery and under GPDR, its still illegal because they didn't get an explicit , informed, consent.

FB really doesn't have a strong leg to stand on in either case.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR WEEKLY TECH NEWSLETTER

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019