Difference between cases 166 and 188

Phoenix Case Discussions
#1

The names of these cases look very similar: https://edit.tosdr.org/cases/188 and https://edit.tosdr.org/cases/166.

According to the description of this last case, it seems like case 166 is about sharing personal data with third parties which aren’t involved in the services’ operation, whereas case 188 would mean the service may share personal data with third parties working with them.

If I didn’t misunderstand the meaning of these cases, I think we should rephrase their titles or change their descriptions to better reflect that.

1 Like
#2

I’d agree! Maybe we can rephrase them as such:

  • Case 166: This service shares your personal data with third parties that are not involved in its operation | (with a higher weight)
  • Case 188: This service can share your personal data with third parties involved in its operation | (with a lower weight, and move it to the Third Parties topic)

What are your thoughts?

4 Likes
#3

Perhaps we could change the phrasing of case 188 to make easier its distinction (without changing its meaning):

  • Case 188: This service gives your personal data to third parties involved in its operation
2 Likes
#4

Sure! Sounds much better.

2 Likes
#5

Are there other opinions on this or can the change be implemented?

2 Likes
#6

I see nothing against this, looks like a good change!

2 Likes
#7

Very well, I’m making the changes rn. Feel free to close this topic!

2 Likes
#8
#9
#10

Sound good.

I hope I understood the applications of the cases correctly.

Maybe the descriptions of the cases could be changed, as well, to clarify. To me, both cases seem to be assigned to services in a random way: some services get 166 for giving away data for targeted ads, some get 188 for doing the same thing.

The description of case 188 could be like " Your personal data is or may be given to third parties essential to the service’s operation. This could be an external spam detection service for an internet forum."

The description of case 166 could be like “Your personal data is or may be given to third parties nonessential to the service’s operation. This could be a business partner that receives your data to provide targeted advertisements.”

2 Likes
#11

I agree with @katzepferd, the descriptions of the cases should be updated to be less ambiguous.

What are your thoughts?

1 Like
#12

The cases have been updated according to @katzepferd’s description proposals.

1 Like
#13

This topic was automatically closed after 9 days. New replies are no longer allowed.