Da-Chief
05-20-2008, 09:26
http://i.dslr.net/urls/14/2314.gif (http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Behavioral-Advertising-Could-Be-Illegal-94578)
CNET's Declan McCullagh e-mails me his latest piece (http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-9947499-38.html) which suggests that ISPs who monitor and sell their customer browsing data could be running afoul of decades-old wiretapping laws. While I've been writing about behavioral advertising for a while (http://www.corpsman.com/forum/shownews/Ask-DSLReportscom-What-Is-NebuAD-91797), Charter's announcement last week (http://www.corpsman.com/shownews/Charter-Starts-Selling-Your-Browsing-History-94421) of their decision to use NebuAD technology was the first glimpse many had of the concept. The pertinent portion from CNET's piece:At least three wiretapping-related federal laws restrict what broadband providers can do: the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA); the Communications Act of 1934; and the Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984. . . the cable privacy law is unusually onerous because it requires the "prior written or electronic consent of the subscriber" before any personally identifiable information can be collected.
In other words, a skilled lawyer could argue the current method of simply offering an opt-out page (which only opts the user out of targeted ads, not data collection) is not enough. Obviously Embarq, who also uses NebuAD (http://www.corpsman.com/shownews/93375), is exempt from the cable law, and Google's Adwords is exempt from all three. But cable's vulnerability to lawsuits may explain why the NebuAD system has so far only been embraced by the most cash-strapped operator.
I couldn't understand why Charter, in a recent interview (http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-9945309-38.html), wanted to pretend that NebuAD didn't use deep packet inspection. Now it's clear that the company was simply covering its legal posterior. Since the Cable TV Privacy Act requires that any simple cash grabs related to privacy require a detailed, working opt-out system, Charter's trying to sell it as a service "enhancement" akin to offering faster speeds (http://www.corpsman.com/shownews/94466) -- in order to skirt federal law.
read comment(s) (http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Behavioral-Advertising-Could-Be-Illegal-94578)
More...
CNET's Declan McCullagh e-mails me his latest piece (http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-9947499-38.html) which suggests that ISPs who monitor and sell their customer browsing data could be running afoul of decades-old wiretapping laws. While I've been writing about behavioral advertising for a while (http://www.corpsman.com/forum/shownews/Ask-DSLReportscom-What-Is-NebuAD-91797), Charter's announcement last week (http://www.corpsman.com/shownews/Charter-Starts-Selling-Your-Browsing-History-94421) of their decision to use NebuAD technology was the first glimpse many had of the concept. The pertinent portion from CNET's piece:At least three wiretapping-related federal laws restrict what broadband providers can do: the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA); the Communications Act of 1934; and the Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984. . . the cable privacy law is unusually onerous because it requires the "prior written or electronic consent of the subscriber" before any personally identifiable information can be collected.
In other words, a skilled lawyer could argue the current method of simply offering an opt-out page (which only opts the user out of targeted ads, not data collection) is not enough. Obviously Embarq, who also uses NebuAD (http://www.corpsman.com/shownews/93375), is exempt from the cable law, and Google's Adwords is exempt from all three. But cable's vulnerability to lawsuits may explain why the NebuAD system has so far only been embraced by the most cash-strapped operator.
I couldn't understand why Charter, in a recent interview (http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-9945309-38.html), wanted to pretend that NebuAD didn't use deep packet inspection. Now it's clear that the company was simply covering its legal posterior. Since the Cable TV Privacy Act requires that any simple cash grabs related to privacy require a detailed, working opt-out system, Charter's trying to sell it as a service "enhancement" akin to offering faster speeds (http://www.corpsman.com/shownews/94466) -- in order to skirt federal law.
read comment(s) (http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Behavioral-Advertising-Could-Be-Illegal-94578)
More...