Strava, your information & GDPR

[Tin Pot]

Has anyone analysed their new terms and conditions?

This sentence stood out to me:

You own your content, but give us a right to use it.

...Use it how?

 

[Slick]

I assume, use it to build your stats.

 

[booze and cake]

That's a bit of a catch all isn't it, reads like 'however the hell we like'

 

[vickster]

Ask them and then don’t sign up if happy. Simples

 

[Bollo]

I’m not even sure that phrase is even be legal under the new GDPR law but it’d take a lawyer to argue the toss.

On a more fundamental level it doesn’t even make much sense. What’s meant by “ownership” of your data if you can’t control how it’s used?!

 

[Alan O]

What’s meant by “ownership” of your data if you can’t control how it’s used?!

You can control how it is used by yourself and by anyone other than Strava. So if you want to publish your own data anywhere else, you're free to and have not given up that right.

The "give us a right to use it" bit is fairly standard, I think - it's been in use at a web site I work on for as long as I can remember. Without it, companies could be severely restricted in the way they can present that data, perhaps to an extent that makes operation of the site impossible.

 

[Milkfloat]

Please don't be naive enough to think that Strava make their money through premium subscriptions. You and your stats are the product.

 

[Bollo]

You can control how it is used by yourself and by anyone other than Strava. So if you want to publish your own data anywhere else, you're free to and have not given up that right.

It was more a philosophical question and probably a rabbit hole as far as this thread is concerned.

I suppose you could interpret Stava's statement as you agreeing to grant a perpetual, unrestricted licence to use your data. It's still wide open enough for me to think twice. I've got an unused Stava account from a time when I was noodling around with their API, but otherwise they'll be extracting a minimum of value from me.

 

[Alan O]

It was more a philosophical question and probably a rabbit hole as far as this thread is concerned.

I suppose you could interpret Stava's statement as you agreeing to grant a perpetual, unrestricted licence to use your data. It's still wide open enough for me to think twice. I've got an unused Stava account from a time when I was noodling around with their API, but otherwise they'll be extracting a minimum of value from me.

Fair enough. My approach is different, in that I'm getting a service I like that I don't have to pay for, and I don't expect Strava to provide me with that without something in return.

 

[Bollo]

Fair enough. My approach is different, in that I'm getting a service I like that I don't have to pay for, and I don't expect Strava to provide me with that without something in return.

I agree completely and make use of other 'free' services on the understanding that my data will be used by them. Ultimately it's an assessment of utility vs privacy. For example, I've never touched FriendFace because it's full of b0llocks and I can almost hear my data being ripped from my browser but I'm happy to use CC, because I get much more out of it than I give up in the Google analytics.

The "give us a right to use it" bit is fairly standard, I think - it's been in use at a web site I work on for as long as I can remember. Without it, companies could be severely restricted in the way they can present that data, perhaps to an extent that makes operation of the site impossible.

Thats entirely the issue with the new GDPR legislation - you're going to have to be much more careful about these blanket statements and how you inform the end user about what they're giving up. It is a genuine change in the way organisations and businesses are allowed to use personal data and it does have the potential to be severely restrictive and require changes to working practices.

I'd recommend anyone who has anything to do with personal data to have a read through the ICO Guidelines at https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/
I've only skimmed it so far, but I'll have to get my head around it properly for my business and a club where I help with the IT.

 

[Tin Pot]

Fines start being handed out in a few weeks so you might want to read it quickly. Everyone was given years to be fully compliant by the 25th of this month.

 

[Tin Pot]

Fair enough. My approach is different, in that I'm getting a service I like that I don't have to pay for, and I don't expect Strava to provide me with that without something in return.

Might be worth knowing what it is that you are trading though, eh?

 

[Bollo]

Fines start being handed out in a few weeks so you might want to read it quickly. Everyone was given years to be fully compliant by the 25th of this month.

Not new legislation, but a new business. I've got no customers yet to worry about!

 

[Tin Pot]

I saw a funny on twitter that made me chuckle

I just received an email from a Nigerian prince who says that unfortunately he has no large sums of money available at the moment, but would like me to confirm before May 25th that I wish to continue receiving emails.

I would post a link to the tweet, but as advised I recently changed my twitter password ... and then promptly forgot it, so I have to sort that out.

Or not...

I may take GDPR as an opportunity to leave StriveBookTwatterIn.com et al

I haven’t looked into the WhatsApp new terms either so it won’t let me in.

 

[bpsmith]

I genuinely don’t see the issue. If you expect a service that isnt funded by members, but costs a significant sum of money to run, but don’t expect there to be anything in it for the owners then you’re pretty naieve or a liar.

Fair enough, they need to tell you, but don’t complain when they do tell you and you have the choice over whether you let them have your data.