The Berlin Regional Court found LinkedIn's ignoring of "Do Not Track" signals and publishing of profiles without permission to be illegal. The ruling supported consumer control over personal data.

The court found that LinkedIn cannot ignore “Do Not Track” signals sent by users’ browsers. These signals allow internet users to opt-out of having their online activities tracked. Despite receiving these signals, LinkedIn still announced on its website that it engages in tracking for analysis and marketing purposes. The court said this communication is misleading, as LinkedIn is legally required to respect the Do Not Track requests.

Additionally, the court banned LinkedIn from automatically making users’ profiles publicly visible when they first create an account. This “Profile Visibility” default setting published users’ information without their consent, violating data protection regulations. Users must expressly agree before their profiles can be visible to non-members.

    • Thomas@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      0·
      1 year ago

      If you tell LinkedIn they do something illegal, they’ll just ignore you. If you ask a court to tell them, they’ll at least have to make a calculation what is cheaper: complying with a court order (less profit from using your data) or ignoring it (more legal fees). We will soon know.

      • anlumo@feddit.deEnglish
        0·
        1 year ago

        Considering how comically low these fines are, we all know the answer to that one.

        • Opafi@feddit.deEnglish
          0·
          1 year ago

          Actually, gdpr violation fines are ridiculously high, so at least there’s hope that they’ll consider complying.