Comment by tedunangst | Hacker News Reader

Comment by tedunangst | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I'm not sure what you mean by saying the law is notoriously slow to adapt, since Facebook is basically quoting the law to the user.

    Section 4(12) of the Acts carves out an exception to
    subject access requests where the disclosures in 
    response would adversely affect trade secrets or 
    intellectual property. We have not provided any 
    information to you which is a trade secret or 
    intellectual property of Facebook Ireland Limited
    or its licensors.

For all I know, Facebook may even be obligated to include such a disclaimer about missing information when processing an information request.

The laws, written in 1988 and 2003, were not designed with modern situations in mind because, back in 1988 or even 2003, many did not foresee the vast influence of social networks. The definition of "trade secret or intellectual property" in those laws are not likely going to give a clear answer as to whether certain Facebook user data fits that definition - i.e. its going to be an ambiguity argued in court unless a settlement is negotiated beforehand (at which point, the uncertainty remains and is waiting for the next controversy).

Historically, at least in the US (and I'd assume the rest of the world), the law adapts slowly to new industries because of (i) the difficulties in deciding how to best tackle the issues in the new industry and (ii) the bureacracy involved in enacting/revising laws.

For example, take a look at the way that hedge fund managers are able to get away with a 15% capital gains tax rate on their entire income because they structure their income to fit the law. The government is still trying to play catch up on that one, years later.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com