from Hacker News

Patreon: Blocking platforms from sharing user video data is unconstitutional

by caseyross on 1/24/24, 3:48 AM with 41 comments

• by BLKNSLVR on 1/24/24, 4:34 AM

  Sounds like Patreon are using knowledge of their members' subscriptions to then sell this 'viewing data' to third parties. Patreon aren't even first-party to which videos are 'watched', they're just a middle-man for payments from end-user to provider.

  It doesn't feel like a huge stretch beyond all the other personal data point selling gross-ness going on between big-tech and advertising, but it makes it feel as if there's nowhere to hide from this scraping of layers off one's digital soul.

  And it could hurt the providers of content. I'm not paying for anything if all the parties in the payment chain are attempting to extract more value from me (my data) than I'm attempting to pay to a provider. Sorry provider, there are no safe avenues.

• by paranoidrobot on 1/24/24, 5:06 AM

  > The Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) blocks businesses from sharing data with third parties on customers' video purchases and rentals. At a minimum, the VPPA requires written consent each time a business wants to share this sensitive video data—including the title, description, and, in most cases, the subject matter.

  This might be a bit off-topic, but does this mean also that what Plex did when it started sending out "Here's what your friends watched this week" emails would also be a violation?

• by Urgo on 1/24/24, 5:21 AM

  I guess at the end of the day the world's legal system needs to decide if when visiting a website do all requests need to stay on the website itself, or if that website is allowed to use any third party sites to run its business as well. That is the crux of what is going on here, not selling viewing history even though that might be leaked.

  The facebook pixel[1][2] that is the center of the legal battles here is routinely used not to sell information to facebook persay, but to allow the website to retarget the website visitor at a later point via an advertisement. For example you visit pateron's website, you might get an ad on facebook later from Patreon.

  Now, can (and does) facebook do more with the data that goes along with it, maybe, but that is what the facebook pixel is routinely used for.. not something sinister, at least by the company who implemented it on their website.

  By only reading the linked article and knowing about the Facebook pixel in general it really feels like Patreon is being forced to challenge this law not because they think its bad, but more because they are being forced to because they are being sued. Things are a lot more nuanced. Should they have just pled guilty though? Absolutely not.

  Personally I think the law should be upheld but the lawsuit against Patreon dismissed.

  [1] https://www.facebook.com/gpa/blog/the-facebook-pixel/

  [2] https://www.facebook.com/business/tools/meta-pixel/

• by Kluggy on 1/24/24, 4:14 AM

  This was just the push I needed to delete my account. Now to find alternative paths to support the folks I like.

• by timthelion on 1/24/24, 5:42 AM

  Their legal argumentation is extremely weak. That said, if they do end up having to pay $2500 per violation they'll probably go bankrupt...

• by anotherhue on 1/24/24, 4:30 AM

  > But Patreon engineer Jason Byttow has said that complying with the VPPA's consent requirement imposes "unnecessary burdens" on Patreon by requiring "substantial engineering work" to build a new consent regime that would ultimately "degrade the user experience."

  Our privacy is inconvenient for them.

• by JumpCrisscross on 1/24/24, 4:32 AM

  Wait, how is targeted advertising on YouTube compliant?

• by drewcoo on 1/24/24, 4:40 AM

  Is this move intended to justify Patreon taking a bigger cut, so that they can justify the cost of our privacy? They could do that and still siphon off much less than YouTube would.

  Alternately, can this be seen as a chink in their armor and a way for someone(s) new to compete in their market?

• by mjfl on 1/24/24, 5:14 AM

  Sounds like they are trying to assist in blackmailing people.

• by anotherhue on 1/24/24, 4:37 AM

  CALL TO ACTION

  Go to your Patreon account, for any active memberships click 'Send Message'. Send something along these lines:

  Hello, apologies for the disruption but I'm wondering if you would consider reaching out to your Patreon representative and voicing your feelings on their recent corporate behaviour, which I'm sure you'll find disagreeable

  https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/01/patreon-attacks-...

  If it's possible to continue supporting you on another platform I would much prefer to do that.

  Thanks as ever for your work.

• by anotherhue on 1/24/24, 4:29 AM

  This is contemptible. I use patreon to support artists and creators. I know those people don't care about my viewing history. Patreon is now the parasitic middleman and should be burned off accordingly.