California Internet providers offer privacy
Dane Jasper doesn’t want to know what you do on the Internet.
Like many digital privacy proponents, Jasper, the CEO of Sonic, a highspeed Internet service provider based in Santa Rosa, was disheartened by moves in Congress this week to undo a nascent set of regulations that affect companies like his.
On Tuesday, the House narrowly voted to scrap rules intended to force Internet providers to get permission from customers before collecting and
selling customers’ data.
Trade associations representing major telecommunications companies and the advertising industry applauded the move. They had lambasted the regulations since their inception, saying that they unfairly undermined Internet providers’ ability to compete against the likes of Google and Facebook, which pocket billions of dollars a year by profiting from their users’ data.
But despite the potential to tap into a lucrative revenue stream, Jasper and executives at other Internet providers across Northern California say they remain deeply averse to trafficking in such data. As consumer awareness about digital privacy continues to expand, it’s a stance that could help smaller Internet providers distinguish themselves from their competitors.
“Consumers are always making decisions based on their personal values, and it’s certainly my hope that we are able to differentiate ourselves in this way,” Jasper said. “But this isn’t a new marketing strategy — this has long been a set of values we’ve held from the start.”
“People trust us with their private use of the Internet,” he said. “They trust that we’re not going to snoop on their activities and that we’re not going to sell them out. It’s entirely a violation of that fundamental basis for the relationship.”
Digital privacy is paramount for Percy Angress of Vallejo, who has been a Sonic customer for five years. His decision to switch Internet providers was based in part on Sonic’s assurances that the company would “resist attempts for other entities to get at” his browsing history and other data.
“The notion that the corporation that supplies my Internet service has a right to simply vacuum up all the data it can about me and every place I visit on the Internet is scary and just offensive,” Angress said.
Sonic was one of 22 smaller Internet providers to sign a letter imploring the House to keep the regulations in place. Eleven of those providers are in Northern California.
“We see ourselves as a service provider, not as a data-mining company,” said Alex Menendez, a co-founder of San Francisco Internet provider Monkeybrains, which also signed the letter sent to Congress. Menendez said he “absolutely” sees his company’s hands-off approach to customer data as a distinct competitive advantage.
Dallas Harris, a legal and policy fellow at consumer advocacy group Public Knowledge, said that while she supports smaller Internet providers getting a “leg up” by virtue of their hands-off approach to customer data, she cautioned that having multiple providers to pick from is a rare luxury in most U.S. markets. Northern California’s comparative abundance of Internet choices means that consumers can shop with their conscience, Harris said, but having so many alternatives isn’t the norm.
“In an ideal world, you would be able to have choice between ISPs. I think it’s great that there are some (providers) out there saying, ‘We will not traffic in customer data,’ but if you live in a place where you only have one option, you’re going to pick that one — because it’s your only option. And that’s exactly why we needed these rules,” Harris said.
The regulations were created by the Federal Communications Commission with the intention of requiring that Internet providers obtain consent from their customers before harvesting a constellation of details including location data, financial and health information, app usage history and the content of communications.
Previously, Internet providers were able to collect and sell such data to advertising and marketing firms unless their customers instructed them to stop. The Senate also passed a resolution to scrap the regulations — which includes a provision that they cannot be reintroduced by the commission — this month.
The White House signaled that President Trump would sign the bill after the House vote. On Thursday, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said the rules were emblematic of the “federal overreach” that the president has pledged to reverse.
“This is a strong step by Congress — they thought the FCC’s actions went too far and weren’t productive,” said Daniel Jaffe, who leads government relations for the Association of National Advertisers. The group has worked for months to lobby against the rules, arguing that the commission needlessly designated a host of innocuous consumer data as “sensitive,” and that consumers would be confused by the opt-in requirements the regulations demand.
“Some people are claiming that this is going to leave the public unprotected. That’s wrong,” Jaffe said. “Our own selfregulatory programs are strong in this area, and the FCC still has authority to step in against inappropriate actions by ISPs.”
In a statement posted online Friday, Gerard Lewis, chief privacy officer and deputy general counsel at Comcast, said that the company does not share customer information related to banking, children or health, among other categories, without first getting consent.
“If a customer does not want us to use other, non-sensitive data to send them targeted ads, we offer them the ability to opt out of receiving such targeted ads,” Lewis said, adding that the company would revise its privacy policy to make its practices more “clear and prominent.”
AT&T referred to a statement released by Jonathan Spalter, the CEO of USTelecom, a trade association for the telecommunications industry.
“This action is another step to remove unnecessary rules and regulations that handicap economic growth and innovation, and moves the country one step closer to ensuring that consumers’ private information is protected uniformly across the entire Internet ecosystem,” Spalter said.
Ernesto Falcon, legislative counsel at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which has been sharply critical of efforts to roll back the regulations, said that he expects states — and California in particular, given its history as a leader in digital privacy regulation — to consider creating their own rules for data collection by Internet providers.
“I have no doubt the state of California, with Attorney General Xavier Becerra and the tilt of the legislature right now, would take this on,” Falcon said. “When the Trump administration goes one direction, the state legislature and (Gov.) Jerry Brown have shown an interest in covering the gap.”
“I don’t want everything in my life to be public,” said Angress, the Sonic customer. “I want the right to opt out of the data mining of me. My politics, my faith, my medicines, my friends, my hobbies are not anyone’s business. If you want to buy that information, talk to me, don't just help yourself,” he said.