Facebook launched a virtual private network that paid users aged 13-35 to harvest all their mobile data. This violated Apple's privacy rules and sparked a battle between the companies. The VPN allowed Facebook to collect data even when apps other than Facebook were being used, without requiring parental approval. While regulations aim to protect privacy, information also has value that is not fully recognized, allowing workarounds like Facebook's VPN. True data privacy will require regulating how companies can monetize personal information.

1. T h e l o n g j o u r n e y t o w a r d t r u e d a t a p r i v a c y
1 | P a g e
ABSTRACT
Some recenteventshave illustratedthe longjourneywe have towardsdataprivacy,all causedbythe
commonrecognitionissuesof informationvaluation. Twocompaniesthatdoindeedunderstandthe
value of informationvaluation,apple andFacebook,are at the cusp of a battle precipice thathasall
to do withthe value achievedbyFacebookthroughthe monetizationof informationandApple’s
relentlesscharge towardsprotectingthe privacyof apple subscribers.
But the fact that Facebookachievedearnings throughitsactionsdescribedinthisarticle andwas
rewardedbyWall Streetillustratesthatwe have a longroad aheadof us, mostlyonthe cultural and
regulatoryfront,totrulyget actionsinline withthe desiresfordataprivacy. Most importantly, the
actionsby Facebookhave illustratedthatwhileinformationhasvalue,the regulationsgoverning
informationhave notcaughtupyet,particularlyondefiningparentalrightsfordataprivacy.
For those of you notaware of the events,Apple andFacebook are currentlyinabattle overFacebook
breachingthe apprulesgoverningthe harvestingof userdata. At the heart of thisbattle was
Facebook’spolicyof providingthose aged13to 35 upto $20 permonth plusreferral feestoharvest
all the data from theirmobile devicesviaa“FacebookResearchVirtual PrivateNetwork”anduse as
Facebooksawfit,whetheroriginatedfromthe usage of Facebookornot. Many of those whoagreed
to receive these moneyswereminors,andthere hasbeennoprovisionforparental approvalof the
use of the FacebookVPN. The FacebookVPN,accordingtoApple,violatedthe partneragreement,
but again,parental rightsnevercame intothe conversation.
Thisarticle will define aseriesof actionsthatcan be anticipatedandwhy the defactorecognitionof
informationvalue mustexistbefore arealisticapproachtowarddata privacycan become reality.

2. T h e l o n g j o u r n e y t o w a r d t r u e d a t a p r i v a c y
2 | P a g e
There has beenaworldwide focusondataprivacy,andregulatorsaroundthe globe have begundefining
rulesgoverningthisdataprivacy. One suchrule isthe rightof erasure as definedbythe EuropeanUnion
and theirGeneral DataProtectionRegulations(GDPR),butthe scheme asdefinedbyFacebookwhich
remuneratesminorsforusingtheirmobile devicesthroughaFacebookprovidedVirtual PrivateNetwork
(VPN) constructedspecificallytoharvest100% of the data accessedthroughtheirmobile device would
not be a violationof the specifiedrules. Moreover,once aminorsignedupforthiscompensationfor
allowingFacebooktoharvesttheirdata,itwouldbe nearimpossible foranyparenttoreverse the
decision,nordoparentshave anyparental rightsforuse of thisVPN,eventhoughthere isanimplied
contract for the use of the VPN (Facebookispayingsubscribersof the VPN ascompensationforallowing
Facebooktoharvest100% of the data accessedthroughtheirmobile device).
While thatthe story about the VPN broke the positive financialsof Facebookwere announced,andWall
StreetrewardedFacebookfortheircreativityinmonetizinginformation.
Until such time thatconsumersare put incharge of the value of theirinformationandcompanies
monetizingthisinformationwithoutadequatecompensationtoconsumers(the $20 is notadequate
compensation) includingrequiringparental approval of suchcontractsenteredinto(parental approval
of enteringintoanagreementwithFacebooktouse the FacebookResearchVPN isnotrequired),the
abilitytoskirtaroundthe law andspiritof data privacyregulationswill be wanton. Consumerschoosing
to signup forthe FacebookResearchVPN donothave to use Facebookservices,theyonly need touse
theirmobile device toprovide datatoFacebook. Minorswill treasure the monthly$20check and will
fightat everyjuncture tohave that stipendremovedfromtheircoffers.
Clearly,the abilityforminorstosignovertheirabilitytoprotecttheirdataprivacyto Facebookwasnot
the intentof GDPR, nor wasthe intentforcompaniestoissue aVPN toharvestall the data accessedon
a mobile device,whetherintendedtothatcompanyor not.
Apple,whichisacompanythat has historicallyvalueddataprivacy(whichisin large partwhyApple
devicesare closedenvironments)hasissueddataprotectionrulestopartneringorganizationswhich
were violated. Regulatorswoulddowell tolookatApple’sdataprivacyagreementsandensure the
protectionsenjoyedbyconsumersof Appleproductsare extendedbyadoptingsome of Apple’sprivacy
rulesintothe privacyregulationssuchasGDPR.
However,one componenthasnotcome underquestion,thatisthe parental rightsover dataprivacy,
accordingto what Facebookhaslaunchedwiththe implementationof theirFacebookResearchVPN,
there are none. One wouldthinkthatcontract rulescarry overintodata privacy,but since there isno
measurable value tothe datastreamavailable throughdeviceslike Facebook’sVPN,atleastfrom a
currentrulesperspective,the contractrules,specificallythose blockingminorsfromenteringinto
contract where there isa financial exposure are nonexistent.
Expectregulatorstotake notice of Facebook’sVPN andblocksuchwantonover-reachingof the spiritof
data protection. Bothregulatorsandcompaniesmustcome togripsoverdata privacy however
(Facebookreceivescompetitive intelligence throughthe VPN forall competitive productsinstalledon

3. T h e l o n g j o u r n e y t o w a r d t r u e d a t a p r i v a c y
3 | P a g e
mobile devisesusingthe VPN withoutcompensatingcompetitorsforthisintelligence,inothercircles,
that wouldbe calledespionage,butbecause the regulationsgoverningthe valuationof information
have not yetmatured,thiswill remainagreyareafor now).
I hope thisarticle does fourthings.
1) I hope itwakesup parentsof minorsto the use of sucha VPN,particularlyif theyhave family
servicesactivatedacrossthe mobile devicesusedintheirhousehold. Itwill be difficulttotake
away the VPN fromminorswhohave subscribed,atleastuntil threateningthe lossof the
phone. Aneducationintowhysigningupforsucha VPN isnecessaryandshouldbe planned
immediately.
2) Informationhasvalue,andconsumersusingsuchVPNsaslaunchedbyFacebookmustrealize
that theyjustsignedupto splay theirlivesforthe perusal byFacebookandthose subscribingto
the data feedsFacebookismarketingtoothers(hence the referral fees). Ihope subscribers
weighthe additional $20from educatingmarketersineveryaspectof theirexistence as
available throughtheirmobile devices.
3) I hope all businessesinstitute aninformationvaluationprogram, becauseinformationcentric
companiessuchas Facebookhave,anditisn’tlongbefore suchprogramstrickle throughthe
mainstreamof theircompetitors. Yes, there are several obstaclesindefiningsuchaprogram,
buryingyourheadinthe sandwon’tsolve the problem.
4) I hope regulatorstake notice of the currentfeudbetweenAppleandFacebookanduse thisfeud
to identifythe shortcomingsof theirdataprivacyregulations. Manyof themwill be ingrainedin
the valuationof informationcomingunderthe scrutinyof dataprivacy. Withouthavinga
penaltyalignedwiththe value of datapotentiallycompromisedbyviolatingdataprivacy
regulationsandnotwithrevenues,itwill be difficultforcompaniestodeterminethe processes
that mustbe overhauledtomeetamore refinedcollectionof dataprivacyrules.

4. T h e l o n g j o u r n e y t o w a r d t r u e d a t a p r i v a c y
4 | P a g e
About the Author
Mark Albala has been one of the early practitioners in wielding information as a competitive
weapon and has served as an advisor to vendors and analysts serving the information insight
industries.
Mark has served much of his career in devising insightful ways to deliver information that is most
usable to deriving and executing action plans. Mark has concentrated a significant portion of his
career in ensuring that the information made available is usable by eliminating the reasons for not
using information when it counts.
Mark currently serves as President of InfoSight Partners, L.L.C., which is a firm whose mission is to
help organizations facilitate their focus into wielding the value of their information assets.
Mark has served in a variety of information strategy, architecture and governance roles and has
been an influential futurist in defining ways in which information could be wielded and has been
an active advocate of the disciplines of information economics and the acceptance and
management of information as an organizational asset.
Mark currently serves as an advisor to companies and analysts and can be reached at
mark@infosightpartners.com.