5 keystrokes over WhatsApp over its privacy policy

The sanction in Argentina against Facebook for the modifications to the privacy policy of WhatsApp and its terms and conditions offer off-piste in Spanish and in a Latin American context regarding the manner of vigilance and sanctioning of a digital economy company with available legal remedies and recourse to the experiences of Europe and Europe, with its respective languages ​​and contexts .

1. Abusive clauses. First, the hechos. Argentina’s consumer protection office Facebook by impressing “abusive clauses” on WhatsApp users and restricting their rights as consumers. WhatsApp is a Facebook subsidiary (by Meta Platforms Inc.) that offers instant messaging services on a global scale.

With the modifications to its terms of service and its January 2121 Privacy Policy, WhatsApp limit its liability for data, incomplete with the need to burn clear information, clear and detailed to its users, and recover personal data without determining its object (finality) or its release, resolves the official.

2. Terms and conditions. Have to keep in mind that it was a sanctioned case of the Consumer protection regime and not since the protection of personal data, although also implicitly related to the privacy.

“Consumers are directly contraindicated in their ability to negotiate” and accept “forms reproduced in series, with clauses edited unilaterally by the provider of the service”, read in the resolution of the National Directorate of Defense of Consumer and Arbitration in Consumption (DNDC), dependent on the Ministry of Productive Development Argentina. The office acts with the principle of “granting a mayor protection to the most debilitating part in commercial relations”.

3. Denuncia ciudadana. The investigation of the consumer’s office is produced by the denunciation of Johanna C. Faliero, an expert expert in information and privacy law, in conformity with the cases of WhatsApp in 2021. The resolution, among other things, imposes a ban on the “use of our personal data”, says Faliero interviewed about the theme. “Here it is definite that it is changing the hecho to make the bad things, is to authorize unrestrictedly on the two of the applications that hagan some of the way that they are correct, absolutely anti-adversarial and in contravention of the regulations tenemos ”, dijo.

Facebook did not present the authority during the treatment of the sentence, but said that he was called to present his position on the subject (“descargo y pruebas”).

4. A rasguño for a beast. The resolution includes an economic sanction against Facebook of 5 million Argentine pesos (the equivalent in the case of $ 50,000 or in the case of one million Mexican pesos). These 5 million Argentine pesos are an insignificant amount for the finances of the social media giants, which alone can act and influence legislators and politicians in Washington cost 20 million dollars in 2021 or the equivalent of 2,100 million Argentine pesos.

For Faliero, author of the books The Right to Anonymous (2019) and The Protection of Personal Data (2021), the amount of the sanction can be ridiculous, but its radical value in the possibility of giving data in the reputation of Facebook y WhatsApp and provoke renewal among consumers to use its services.

5. Spanish language. The sanctioning of the consumer office of Argentina — which will be appealed by Facebook, as I confirmed a quote from Meta– is subject to a requirement of vigilance and sanction in Spanish idiom, which can be replicated by the authorities of other Latin American countries, which share a common vision of the human rights and the Traverse Human Rights System, and which have other traditions the defense of consumers.

Insisting on the subject of the language because of the regulatory acquisitions in Latin America, there are large scales of companies and services in the digital economy, dominated mainly by entities known as Facebook, Google, Amazon, Microsoft o Apple and with the English idiom as a derivation of priority priority.

The Argentine example should incentivize other national authorities to refute the idea that companies with their own jurisdictions are in need of legal complicity in offering their services. Imagine for a second Profeco do we defend ourselves?

José Soto Galindo

Editor of The Economist Online

Economy

Periodical. Since 2010, the digital version of The Economist has been published in Mexico City. Master in Transparency and Protection of Personal Data at the University of Guadalajara. It specializes in the communication of telecommunications and information technologies. My personal blog is Economicón.



Reference-www.eleconomista.com.mx

Leave a Comment