[governance] Privacy Flare-Up Prompts Facebook Meetings with Congress, Employees

[Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro]

There should be a distinction between shareholders and customers. The
actual shareholders, Zuckerberg and others are the ones who receive
dividends from the company.

Because the consumers drive the company in terms of the creation of a
demand through exploiting people's need and basic desire to
communicate and keep in touch with their friends and relatives - to
persuade them to boycott Facebook is going to have to have a strategic
approach that is psychological and persuasive enough to cause them to
forego facebook, at least for a week or two. If facebook users all
over the world collectively shut down for a day, a week, a month, two
months, it would literally cripple facebook. Advertising companies who
share revenue sharing agreements with Facebook would pull back,
investors may have second thoughts, the directors would sit up and
take notice.

Facebook probably thinks that it is untouchable and is a virtual world
on its own. Until someone regulates it. For someone from outside the
US, it could be through the Alien Tort Act if it still exists.

The other way is through the GATS but it will meet some seriously
heavy resistance from lobying by multinationals.

The real question though is whose interests are being served?



On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 6:04 AM, Michael Gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/05/facebook-privacy-meeting/
>
> Roughly 20% of Facebook users are from the US (based on 500,000,000 users)
> and as a proportion Canadians are I believe, the largest users of Facebook
> by overall national population.
>
> If, as these folks in the US congress seem to think, there are issues of
> privacy in the use of Facebook that might at some point warrant
> legislative/regulatory intervention--what is the proper jurisdiction in
> which that legislation/regulation should occur?
>
> Where it has its legal registration, where the majority of its shareholders
> reside, where it's the impacts of its behaviours are most widely experienced
> and so on and so on?
>
> Why should (can I expect) US Congressmen to act on my behalf to protect my
> privacy as a Canadian using Facebook and what about all of the other
> 400,000,000 non-US users?
>
> These, I think, are among the issues of Internet Governance for CS to be
> addressing and not simply the issues, but more importantly what modalities
> could/should be established to respond to these issues on behalf of all of
> those impacted.
>
> Mike
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>



-- 
Sala

"Stillness in the midst of the noise".
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t