5 ms·
This is the ludicrous part: > LinkedIn rejected the request on the grounds that protecting that data took precedence. Guess that implies that paying takes pre
by noname120 4mo ago
This is the ludicrous part:
> LinkedIn rejected the request on the grounds that protecting that data took precedence.
Guess that implies that paying takes precedence on data protection
- bee_rider 4mo agoI wonder if they will be able to make any argument along the lines of: we’re much more confident about the identities of paying customers so we think there’s less privacy risk in that case. I think they should lose the case but I’m curious if anyone can think of a good argument for their side, at all (in the European context where there are data laws, “it’s their website they do what they want” is the conventional US perspective but I don’t really see what that leaves us to discuss).
- jmkd 4mo agoThey should give the data to people who ask, which will be a snapshot in time presented in a spreadsheet. Then what you are paying for is the interface that shows you who clicked yesterday with a thumbnail and a link to their profile, and who will click tomorrow, as long as you keep paying. But refusing the download option is not on.