2017 Broadband Consumer Privacy Proposal repeal

Last updated

On 28 March 2017, the United States House of Representatives passed a resolution of disapproval (S.J.Res 34) to overturn the Broadband Consumer Privacy Proposal privacy law by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and was expected to be approved by United States' President Donald Trump. [1] [2] [3] [4] It was passed with 215 Republican votes against 205 votes of disapproval.

Contents

The repealed privacy protections, once approved in 2016, sought to regulate what companies can do with data of customers' browsing habits, communication contents, app usage history, location data and social security numbers and safeguard customer data against hackers and thieves. [1]

Supporters of the vote argued that the privacy regulations stifle innovation by forcing Internet providers to abide by unreasonably strict guidelines. [1]

Due to the repeal Internet service providers (ISP) like Comcast, AT&T and Verizon may sell Web browsing histories and other sensitive data directly to marketers, financial firms and other companies without consumers' consent. Furthermore, the FCC will be forbidden from issuing similar rules in the future. [1]

Background

Internet providers have historically generated their revenue from selling access to the Internet and are now looking to increase their revenue by tapping the data their customers generate as they make use of the Internet. [1] [ additional citation(s) needed ]

The industry with its profit motive favors an interpretation of privacy that does not consider browsing history or app usage data to be sensitive and protected — the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) interpretation. [1] However the FTC is unable to enforce its own guidelines without new authority from Congress. [1]

On 16 March 2017 CTIA claims that "Web browsing and app usage history are not 'sensitive information'" in a filing with the FCC. [5]

History

Reception

Many of the privacy advocates who oppose ISP data sharing also oppose tracking by ad networks and technology companies such as Google but find ISP tracking extra worrisome as ISPs have access to all of one's browsing data − not just data from specific sites that share their data with particular ad networks, and as disabling cookies or adblockers can't prevent this sort of tracking. [2]

Jeffrey Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy states that the vote means that "Americans will never be safe online from having their most personal details stealthily scrutinized and sold to the highest bidder". [1]

Senator Brian Schatz states that "if this [resolution] is passed, neither the FCC nor the FTC will have clear authority when it comes to how Internet service providers protect consumers' data privacy and security. Regardless of politics, allowing ISPs to operate in a rule-free zone without any government oversight is reckless". [9]

According to Anna Eshoo the consequences of the resolution's passage are clear: "broadband providers like AT&T, Comcast, and others will be able to sell your personal information to the highest bidder without your permission". [15]

Michael Copps, a former member of the Federal Communications Commission, called the bill a "perversion of what the internet was supposed to be". [2]

Dallas Harris, an attorney who specializes in broadband privacy and a policy fellow at consumer advocacy group Public Knowledge notes that ISPs might be able to figure out where you bank, your political views, and your sexual orientation based on what sites you visit and asserts that "the level of information that they can figure out is beyond what even most customers expect". Various information can be extracted from Internet traffic − for instance "the fact that you're looking at a website can reveal when you're home, when you're not home" and according to her "you don't need to see the contents of every communication to develop efficient ad tracking mechanisms". [12]

Senator Ed Markey states that "President Trump may be outraged by fake violations of his own privacy, but every American should be alarmed by the very real violation of privacy that will result [from] the Republican roll-back of broadband privacy protections". [11]

Cable lobby group NCTA says that they "appreciate today's Senate action to repeal unwarranted FCC rules that deny consumers consistent privacy protection online and violate competitive neutrality". [11]

Michael Capuano asks "What the heck are you thinking? What is in your mind? Why would you want to give out any of our personal information to a faceless corporation for the sole purpose of them selling it?". [16] [17]

Evan Greer, campaign director of digital rights group Fight for the Future states that "today Congress proved once again that they care more about the wishes of the corporations that fund their campaigns than they do about the safety and security of their constituents". She also states that: [3]

Gutting these privacy rules won’t just allow internet service providers to spy on us and sell our personal information, it will also enable more unconstitutional mass government surveillance, and fundamentally undermine our cybersecurity by making our sensitive personal information vulnerable to hackers, identity thieves, and foreign governments

Craig Aaron, Free Press Action Fund President and CEO writes in a statement: [10]

Ignoring calls from thousands of their constituents, House Republicans just joined their colleagues in the Senate in violating internet users’ privacy rights. Apparently they see no problem with cable and phone companies snooping on your private medical and financial information, your religious activities or your sex life. They voted to take away the privacy rights of hundreds of millions of Americans just so a few giant companies could pad their already considerable profits. Facing a growing public outcry, they rushed through this vote before more people could find out what was at stake.

SearchInternetHistory.com is a crowdfunding campaign trying to raise $1 million to buy the browsing history of Republican officeholders like Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and then Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, and FCC Chair Ajit Pai. [2]

Management

Consumers may switch to ISPs with better privacy protections. However this could be difficult for some as many Americans only have a choice of one or two broadband companies in their area according to federal statistics. [1] Senator Ron Wyden states that thus their only choice may be between "giving up their browsing history for an Internet provider to sell to the highest bidder or having no Internet at all". [11] Furthermore, the existence of such ISPs is not guaranteed and Jeremy Gillula, a senior staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation notes that it's "unclear if they would even have to tell you they were doing it". [18]

VPN can be used to protect one's data from ISPs. [2] [12] [19] [20] [21] However good VPNs generally cost money, take some effort and minor technical skills to set up, and will slightly degrade the connection speed. [2]

Furthermore, the Tor browser can be used to surf anonymously. This would however significantly slow down connection speed and not be adequate in most cases. [12] [22] [19]

Also ISPs can't look into the encrypted traffic of sites that use TLS whose URLs starts with "HTTPS" but only the domain name. [12] [19] The HTTPS Everywhere browser extension allows for better protection via HTTPS. [12] [23] Also apps that use end-to-end encryption can be used to protect communication contents. [19]

Some consumers might assume that they can protect their browsing histories by deleting them [2] or by using privacy modes of browsers such as Chrome's "incognito mode" which is not the case. [22] [12]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Internet service provider</span> Organization that provides access to the Internet

An Internet service provider (ISP) is an organization that provides myriad services related to accessing, using, managing, or participating in the Internet. ISPs can be organized in various forms, such as commercial, community-owned, non-profit, or otherwise privately owned.

Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) is a Washington, D.C.–based 501(c)(3) nonprofit organisation that advocates for digital rights and freedom of expression. CDT seeks to promote legislation that enables individuals to use the internet for purposes of well-intent, while at the same time reducing its potential for harm. It advocates for transparency, accountability, and limiting the collection of personal information.

Internet privacy involves the right or mandate of personal privacy concerning the storage, re-purposing, provision to third parties, and display of information pertaining to oneself via the Internet. Internet privacy is a subset of data privacy. Privacy concerns have been articulated from the beginnings of large-scale computer sharing and especially relate to mass surveillance.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Net neutrality</span> Principle that Internet service providers should treat all data equally

Network neutrality, often referred to as net neutrality, is the principle that Internet service providers (ISPs) must treat all Internet communications equally, offering users and online content providers consistent transfer rates regardless of content, website, platform, application, type of equipment, source address, destination address, or method of communication. Net neutrality was advocated for in the 1990s by the presidential administration of Bill Clinton in the United States. Clinton's signing of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, an amendment to the Communications Act of 1934, set a worldwide example for net neutrality laws and the regulation of ISPs.

Bandwidth throttling consists in the limitation of the communication speed, of the ingoing (received) or outgoing (sent) data in a network node or in a network device such as computers and mobile phones.

A data cap, often referred to as a bandwidth cap, is a restriction imposed on data transfer over a network. In particular, it refers to policies imposed by an internet service provider to limit customers' usage of their services; typically, exceeding a data cap would require the subscriber to pay additional fees. Implementation of a data cap is sometimes termed a fair access policy, fair usage policy, or usage-based billing by ISPs.

Municipal broadband is broadband Internet access offered by public entities. Services are often provided either fully or partially by local governments to residents within certain areas or jurisdictions. Common connection technologies include unlicensed wireless, licensed wireless, and fiber-optic cable. Many cities that previously deployed Wi-Fi based solutions, like Comcast and Charter Spectrum, are switching to municipal broadband. Municipal fiber-to-the-home networks are becoming more prominent because of increased demand for modern audio and video applications, which are increasing bandwidth requirements by 40% per year. The purpose of municipal broadband is to provide internet access to those who cannot afford internet from internet service providers and local governments are increasingly investing in said services for their communities.

In the United States, net neutrality—the principle that Internet service providers (ISPs) should make no distinctions between different kinds of content on the Internet, and to not discriminate based on such distinctions—has been an issue of contention between end-users and ISPs since the 1990s. With net neutrality, ISPs may not intentionally block, slow down, or charge different rates for specific online content. Without net neutrality, ISPs may prioritize certain types of traffic, meter others, or potentially block specific types of content, while charging consumers different rates for that content.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Internet in the United States</span>

The Internet in the United States grew out of the ARPANET, a network sponsored by the Advanced Research Projects Agency of the U.S. Department of Defense during the 1960s. The Internet in the United States of America in turn provided the foundation for the worldwide Internet of today.

Tiered service structures allow users to select from a small set of tiers at progressively increasing price points to receive the product or products best suited to their needs. Such systems are frequently seen in the telecommunications field, specifically when it comes to wireless service, digital and cable television options, and broadband internet access.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ajit Pai</span> American lawyer (born 1973)

Ajit Varadaraj Pai is an American lawyer who served as chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from 2017 to 2021. He has been a partner at the private-equity firm Searchlight Capital since April 2021.

The Internet Association (IA) was an American lobbying group based in Washington, D.C., which represented companies involved in the Internet. It was founded in 2012 by Michael Beckerman and several companies, including Google, Amazon, eBay, and Facebook, and was most recently headed by president and CEO K. Dane Snowden before shutting down.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tom Wheeler</span> American businessman and politician (born 1946)

Thomas Edgar Wheeler is an American businessman and former government official. A member of the Democratic Party, he served as the 31st Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Michael O'Rielly</span> U.S. Federal Communications Commissioner

Michael O'Rielly is a former commissioner of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC), an independent agency of the United States government. He was nominated by President Barack Obama in August 2013 and was confirmed on October 29, 2013, taking office on November 4, 2013. He was nominated to complete the term of outgoing commissioner Robert M. McDowell which ended on June 30, 2014. He was then renominated and reconfirmed by the Senate.

<i>Verizon Communications Inc. v. FCC</i> (2014)

Verizon Communications Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, 740 F.3d 623, was a case at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit vacating portions of the FCC Open Internet Order of 2010, which the court determined could only be applied to common carriers and not to Internet service providers. The case was initiated by Verizon, which would have been subjected to the proposed FCC rules, though they had not yet gone into effect. The case has been regarded as an important precedent on whether the FCC can regulate network neutrality.

Net neutrality law refers to laws and regulations which enforce the principle of net neutrality.

Internet censorship in Switzerland is regulated by the Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland on a case by case basis. Internet services provided by the registered with BAKOM Internet service providers (ISPs) are subject to a "voluntary recommendation" by the Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland, which requires blocking of websites just after 18 December 2007. As of October 2015, this might change soon and additional topics like Online gambling are on the focus now.

"Net Neutrality" is the first segment devoted to net neutrality in the United States of the HBO news satire television series Last Week Tonight with John Oliver. It aired for 13 minutes on June 1, 2014, as part of the fifth episode of Last Week Tonight's first season.

<i>Mozilla Corp. v. FCC</i> 2019 American court case

Mozilla Corp. v. FCC, 940 F. 3d 1 was a ruling the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 2019 related to net neutrality in the United States. The case centered on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)'s decision in 2017 to rollback its prior 2015 Open Internet Order, reclassifying Internet services as an information service rather than as a common carrier, deregulating principles of net neutrality that had been put in place with the 2015 order. The proposed rollback had been publicly criticized during the open period of discussion, and following the FCC's issuing of the rollback, several states and Internet companies sued the FCC. These cases were consolidated into the one led by the Mozilla Corporation.

A virtual private network (VPN) service provides a proxy server to help users bypass Internet censorship such as geo-blocking and users who want to protect their communications against data profiling or MitM attacks on hostile networks.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 "The House just voted to wipe away the FCC's landmark Internet privacy protections". Washington Post. Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 "What the Republican online privacy bill means for you". Vox. Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  3. 1 2 Solon, Olivia (29 March 2017). "Trump poised to sign away privacy protections for internet users". The Guardian. Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  4. ↑ Schultz, Marisa (29 March 2017). "Trump likely to sign bill allowing ISPs to sell your browsing data". New York Post. Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  5. ↑ "ISPs say your Web browsing and app usage history isn't "sensitive"". Ars Technica. Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  6. ↑ "FCC imposes ISP privacy rules and takes aim at mandatory arbitration". Ars Technica. Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  7. 1 2 "S.J.Res. 34 – Disapproving the Federal Communications Commission's Rule on Privacy of Customers of Broadband Services". whitehouse.gov. 28 March 2017. Archived from the original on 28 March 2017. Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  8. ↑ "Flake to use CRA in bid to undo FCC broadband privacy rules". POLITICO. Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  9. 1 2 "GOP senators' new bill would let ISPs sell your Web browsing data". Ars Technica. Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  10. 1 2 "House Republicans Vote to Destroy FCC's Online Privacy Protections". yubanet.com. Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  11. 1 2 3 4 5 "Senate votes to let ISPs sell your Web browsing history to advertisers". Ars Technica. Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  12. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 "How ISPs can sell your Web history—and how to stop them". Ars Technica. Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  13. ↑ "Roll Call 202 | Bill Number: S. J. Res. 34 | MAR 28, 2017, 05:56 PM | 115TH CONGRESS, 1ST SESSION". clerk.house.gov.
  14. ↑ "Trump signs repeal of U.S. broadband privacy rules". Reuters. April 4, 2017.
  15. ↑ Kastrenakes, Jacob (28 March 2017). "Congress just cleared the way for internet providers to sell your web browsing history". CNBC. Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  16. ↑ "Senate votes to let ISPs sell your browsing data" . Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  17. ↑ Lofholm, Andrew (29 March 2017). "Internet providers likely allowed to sell personal browser data without user's consent". WPTV. Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  18. ↑ Estes, Adam Clark (29 March 2017). "How to Hide Your Browsing History From Your Snooping ISP". Gizmodo. Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  19. 1 2 3 4 Adi Robertson (25 March 2017). "A VPN can stop internet companies from selling your data — but it's not a magic bullet". The Verge. Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  20. ↑ Thomson, Iain (28 March 2017). "So my ISP can now sell my browsing history – what can I do?". The Register . Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  21. ↑ Collins, J. Carlton. "Protect Your Online Privacy with a VPN".
  22. 1 2 Iqbal, Maneeza (29 March 2017). "Here's how you can still protect your web history from marketers". KCRA. Retrieved 29 March 2017.
  23. ↑ McCarthy, Kieren (28 March 2017). "Your internet history on sale to highest bidder: US Congress votes to shred ISP privacy rules". The Register . Retrieved 29 March 2017.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.