I think bureaucracy had little to do with it. As I recall, the first Netflix contest did indeed expose private, and sometimes embarrassing, information.
This was a privacy issue, and something legitimate to address.
Right, but I find it astonishing that it was necessary to cancel the competition altogether.
I find it surprising that there wasn't a middle-ground which anonymized or didn't include personally identifying information.
I feel the lack of a middle-ground is probably due to the lawsuit plaintiffs refusing to back down (presumably for financial gain) and thus causing Netflix to hedge their risk.
Good point, was at a loss for the right word when I commented.
This kind of behavior by lawyers is just like patent trolling and I couldn't pinpoint a word for that. Maybe privacy trolling? The lawyers are the same ones that sued Facebook for Beacon.
Comments
I think bureaucracy had little to do with it. As I recall, the first Netflix contest did indeed expose private, and sometimes embarrassing, information.
This was a privacy issue, and something legitimate to address.
Right, but I find it astonishing that it was necessary to cancel the competition altogether.
I find it surprising that there wasn't a middle-ground which anonymized or didn't include personally identifying information.
I feel the lack of a middle-ground is probably due to the lawsuit plaintiffs refusing to back down (presumably for financial gain) and thus causing Netflix to hedge their risk.
privacy issues dont necessarily need to be dealt with by lawsuits. Most lawsuits are about money.
Not to quibble, but lawsuits are also not bureaucracy.
Good point, was at a loss for the right word when I commented.
This kind of behavior by lawyers is just like patent trolling and I couldn't pinpoint a word for that. Maybe privacy trolling? The lawyers are the same ones that sued Facebook for Beacon.