Carding 4 Carders
Professional
Now the service will not be able to ignore "do-not-track" signals. If he doesn't appeal…
In Germany, a scandal broke out over the social network LinkedIn and its privacy policy. The Federation of German Consumer Organizations has won a lawsuit accusing the platform's owners of violating users rights and ignoring their privacy concerns.
The essence of the accusation is that LinkedIn previously ignored DNT (do-not-track) signals from users who log in to their accounts via browsers. Using these signals, a person can prohibit tracking their actions on the site, but in this case the tool turned out to be completely useless.
The LinkedIn help page contains a warning that the platform does not take DNT into account. The court ordered the developers to remove this post.
The warning text says that the universal standard for DNT signals has not yet been adopted, so the company does not use them. However, following amendments to the California Online Privacy Act of September 27, 2013, LinkedIn was required to process such statements and provide feedback to subscribers.
As Rosemary Rodden, a lawyer for the consumer protection organization, points out: "When people enable DNT in their browser, it's a clear signal that they don't want information about their activity to be used for setting up ads and other purposes. Site owners must respect this choice."
Representatives of the company intend to appeal the court's decision, referring to the fact that the warning concerns an outdated version of their platform. However, experts believe that the appeal is unlikely to bring success.
The court found that LinkedIn did collect personal information, such as IP addresses, for analytical and marketing purposes, including providing access to databases to third parties without the consent of subscribers.
Regulators have acknowledged that LinkedIn's warning is misleading users, because the DNT signal is legally binding under European laws.
In addition, German judges have banned LinkedIn from enabling public access to all accounts by default. Previously, this setting made personal pages available to search engines and unregistered users without the owners ' consent.
Experts call the court's decision a wake-up call for Internet giants, whose business model is based on mass collection of personal information. Consumers are increasingly expressing dissatisfaction with this practice and demanding more control over their security in the digital world. Their claims are supported in courts all over Europe. Defeating LinkedIn's principles is probably just the beginning.
In Germany, a scandal broke out over the social network LinkedIn and its privacy policy. The Federation of German Consumer Organizations has won a lawsuit accusing the platform's owners of violating users rights and ignoring their privacy concerns.
The essence of the accusation is that LinkedIn previously ignored DNT (do-not-track) signals from users who log in to their accounts via browsers. Using these signals, a person can prohibit tracking their actions on the site, but in this case the tool turned out to be completely useless.
The LinkedIn help page contains a warning that the platform does not take DNT into account. The court ordered the developers to remove this post.
The warning text says that the universal standard for DNT signals has not yet been adopted, so the company does not use them. However, following amendments to the California Online Privacy Act of September 27, 2013, LinkedIn was required to process such statements and provide feedback to subscribers.
As Rosemary Rodden, a lawyer for the consumer protection organization, points out: "When people enable DNT in their browser, it's a clear signal that they don't want information about their activity to be used for setting up ads and other purposes. Site owners must respect this choice."
Representatives of the company intend to appeal the court's decision, referring to the fact that the warning concerns an outdated version of their platform. However, experts believe that the appeal is unlikely to bring success.
The court found that LinkedIn did collect personal information, such as IP addresses, for analytical and marketing purposes, including providing access to databases to third parties without the consent of subscribers.
Regulators have acknowledged that LinkedIn's warning is misleading users, because the DNT signal is legally binding under European laws.
In addition, German judges have banned LinkedIn from enabling public access to all accounts by default. Previously, this setting made personal pages available to search engines and unregistered users without the owners ' consent.
Experts call the court's decision a wake-up call for Internet giants, whose business model is based on mass collection of personal information. Consumers are increasingly expressing dissatisfaction with this practice and demanding more control over their security in the digital world. Their claims are supported in courts all over Europe. Defeating LinkedIn's principles is probably just the beginning.
