When it comes to online games like Farmville, are we the players - or the ones being played?
Earlier this week, the Wall Street Journal revealed a privacy lapse in Facebook that allowed third party app companies - notably Farmville-creator Zynga - to access private user information and then re-distribute it to advertisers and tracking companies. Up to 218 million Zynga users might have been affected by this privacy issue.
That Facebook would be involved in another privacy scandal is no great shock to me. What is surprising is how mixed the public reaction was to this news. Alongside the angry and upset comments - made in the many online debates that popped up on Monday - were almost as many "so whats" by citizens, technology bloggers, influencers and even journalists.
At the eight-year mark for social media, and over two decades of the Internet, have we, as a society, grown used to the idea that there is no longer any such thing as personal privacy? Have we become desensitized to the risks, because we already voluntarily share private details about our lives on a daily basis online?
The most disturbing element to "Farmville-gate" for me, as an individual and an Internet law attorney, is that these privacy violations were (allegedly) being made by products that already made money from their users. Not that I am rationalizing the past privacy violations of companies like Facebook and Google (e.g., Beacon, "Like" buttons, Buzz, Street View), but it is less surprising when "freeware" is later found to have been accessing users' information for financial gain - because the profitability is not really there. But it's more egregious for applications that already have a legitimate financial component in place. After all, Zynga is reported to have 2010 revenues of $600 million. And its game apps like Farmville are designed to make money by selling virtual goods. Therefore, this (alleged) sideline business of distributing user information is an even greater violation of trust.
It also raises a disturbing question: Is the purpose of online games like Farmville and Mafia Wars to be "games" - profitable, money-making games? Or is the game element only the first layer (necessary in order to gain wide acceptance with the public) while the real goal is to disseminate monitoring applications that, like sleeper cells, wait to be activated?
We may be getting 'used' to the idea of the invasion of our privacy - but that doesn't excuse it. Consumers have a legal right to be informed - before the fact - that their personal information may be monitored, recorded or distributed. And some form of permission request must be required - whether it is by direct consent, in which the consumer must deliberately check a box or click a button; or by indirect consent, where they are informed that by becoming a part of a community, service or platform they are also agreeing to the terms and conditions of that community, which includes information gathering and distribution.
Farmville-gate also raises questions about who is ultimately responsible for our security - the social network, like Facebook, or each individual user? For some time now, there have been questions about the vetting procedure for third party applications that run on a closed operating system or online platform - like Apple's iOS mobile platform, Google's Android mobile platform, or, in the current case, Facebook. In the world of mobile apps, recent studies have found a high percentage of third party apps were found to be harvesting user data. (In October, pskl.us reported that 68-percent of tested iPhone apps harvested unique IDs. Lookout reported in August that over 80 wallpaper apps in Android Market harvested personal information.)
Who bears the blame?
Within the privacy community, there are efforts underway to improve protections for consumers and prevent the widespread adoption of these privacy exploitation practices. Ideas like the current effort by Consumer Watchdog's InsideGoogle.com to create a national "Do Not Track Me List" are well-intentioned, but would be difficult to implement, due to technological and legal issues.
So what's Joe Schmo to do in this brave new Web 2.0 world?
Be vigilant. Research social networks, mobile operating systems, third-party apps and online venues before you join them. If you find you are a victim, take action. Consumers can do this by filing formal complaints with the government's consumer affairs bureaus at the federal and local levels; contacting advocacy groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation (www.eff.org); writing formal complaints to the service provider; making other users aware of the risks; or joining lawsuits already in process to make sure the guilty party pays a fair amount for the damage it has caused.
For an Internet law attorney you don't seem to be very well-versed in your chosen area of expertise.
Here's my two cents on the subject in the video game canon blog:
http://videogamecanon.blogspot.com/2010/10/just-click-stupid.html
That being said I don't even like Farmville or any other fb games.
I play silly video games because they are one of the only times I take a break from an almost 24/7 struggle to keep afloat as a young person in this economy. The last thing I need to know - or care about - is if my gaming will leave me vulnerable to the murky threat you propose.
It's becoming quite possible that FB has been "grooming" its user base to be less & less careful with private information. [Reference: Wiki page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_grooming ]
News flash: It's worked, people. If you're still playing out there, consider why. Try discussing this with some real people you know and trust; family members or close friends. Consider if you would have shared information in the way you are today, if you had known all you know on Day One of Facebook citizenship.
My guess is you probably would not make the same choice.