
Facebook Users Must Be Allowed To Use Pseudonyms, Says German Privacy Regulator - iProject
http://techcrunch.com/2012/12/18/facebook-users-must-be-allowed-to-use-pseudonyms-says-german-privacy-regulator-real-name-policy-erodes-online-freedoms/
======
slowpoke
I always wonder during those discussions - what exactly is a "real" name
supposed to be? I don't have "real" name. Rather, I have many chosen names,
and a name my parents gave me. I consider all of these names real, as they
refer to a facet of my personality, a part of me.

I do have a legal name - my birth name. It's but one of many. Why is my legal
name important? It isn't. I don't even consider it my primary name. The
concept of one single "real" name is severely retarded and flies in the face
of reality. We need to get rid of this concept, along with the illusion of a
single identity. I simply am not the same person when I am with my parents,
when I'm with my meatspace friends, or if I'm hanging out on IRC with people I
know pretty well, but have never seen or met. I'm someone different here on HN
than I am on 4chan, or any other message board. That's perfectly human, and no
company or law will ever change that.

~~~
debacle
> Why is my legal name important? It isn't. I don't even consider it my
> primary name. The concept of one single "real" name is severely retarded and
> flies in the face of reality. We need to get rid of this...

No, sorry. No.

Your legal name is important. If you ever get incarcerated, your legal name
will be on the docket. If you have a license or passport, your legal name will
be on it. Your taxes have your legal name, as well as any other government
certificates you may ever have.

~~~
slowpoke
Your examples only make a legal name important if you consider these things
important. I don't, and they aren't. Part of why we need to get rid of the
concept of a legal name is _exactly_ for this reason. A government has no
business and no authority to decide who I am.

~~~
moheeb
They don't decide who you are...you tell them.

~~~
jlgreco
More accurately, you have the option to tell them. In most cases somebody
already told them on your behalf.

------
stared
Honestly, I don't get it. While approach to usernames and privacy varies,
participation in FB is voluntary.

And real names have some advantages (e.g. much harder time for trolls); sure,
they have disadvantages as well...

...but I don't like the idea of a country saying about features a certain
product needs to have (or even - thinking that they can say, because AFAIK in
the current state Germany can make usage of FB illegal for their citizens, as
it is no located in Germany).

~~~
wes-exp
_... participation in FB is voluntary._

Facebook is used as the exclusive sign-on system for various services besides
Facebook itself. For instance, Spotify uses it, and last I checked it is not
possible to use Spotify at all without using Facebook.

If Facebook continues to grow, the consequences of not using Facebook could be
more severe than at present. It's a classic example of network effects.

Once something becomes a necessity, such as telephone or internet, I think you
have a strong case to say that even though using it is technically voluntary,
the price of not using it is so high that most people have no choice.

Is Facebook at that level of necessity today? Not for me, but maybe it is for
some people.

~~~
AdamFernandez
Technically voluntary, is still very much voluntary. As is using Spotify, or
any other service that requires a Facebook login. I disagree with the
philosophy that true online identity is better for all, but also disagree that
Facebook should be forced to do this. People have other choices, and had other
choices while Facebook was growing. People chose the 'true' identity social
network long before it was the dominant player in the space. People kept
choosing it before the super network effects kicked in.

~~~
chimeracoder
And when your ISP starts requiring you to sign in with Facebook via a captive
portal before you can browse the Internet at home, will you still continue to
"choose" the "true identity social network"?

------
zxcdw
I think it should be a rule in the internet that users should have a right to
use whichever pseudonym they wish. Anonymity would be great too, but obviously
it does not work in certain cases.

I for one won't use Facebook or any other social media as long as I can't use
a fake name. At times it feels a shame, really.

~~~
recycleme
It may be against Facebook's TOS to use a fake name but you can definitely get
away with it. However, if you are adding friends and family to your list of
facebook friends then it might not be hard at all to figure your real name
out.

~~~
darklajid
Please let's not use 'allowed to use a pseudonym' and 'wants to hide his real
name' interchangeably.

If you want to/have to hide your real name, a pseudonym might help (and your
suggestion is helpful). But not everyone using a pseudonym tries desperately
to hide his real name.

Nothing against your post, I just want to make a case for pseudonyms while
avoiding to reduce this to 'some people are in real danger of violence' cases
etc.

Let people choose their names. Regardless of their motivation.

~~~
marshray
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iab-privacy-terminology-01> tries to define
some of this terminology:

* Pseudonym: An identifier of a subject other than one of the subject's real names.

* Real name: The opposite of a pseudonym. For example, [...]

* Pseudonymous: A property of a data subject in which the subject is identified by a pseudonym.

* Pseudonymity: The state of being pseudonymous.

 _Pseudonymity is strengthened when less personal data can be linked to the
pseudonym; when the same pseudonym is used less often and across fewer
contexts; and when independently chosen pseudonyms are more frequently used
for new actions (making them, from an observer's or attacker's perspective,
unlinkable)._

So according to these definitions, you're right that a _pseudonym_ by itself
may not require one to conceal their "real" identity. However, _pseudonymity_
clearly does.

I think _pseudonymity_ is the more fundamental as a general security property.
So your example of a person using a pseudonym without significant desire for
pseudonymity is more of a corner case, at least in serious discussions.

If we need a term for a pseudonym without strong pseudonymity, I propose we
use the term from IRC and call it a "nick".

------
kyllo
Interesting--there are other countries where you are required by law to
register with your real name (and national ID #) on every site. South Korea
had such a law until it was struck down in August of this year. The
perspective on whether anonymity online is a right differs very much by local
culture and political climate.

~~~
Strshps1MoreTim
Of course corrupted governments don't want criticism from anonymous, hard to
find sources.

------
Scramblejams
IANAL. If Facebook didn't have a headquarters in Europe (Ireland, according to
the article), would there be any chance of Germany enforcing this?

I can think of a number of communities which have chosen to require the use of
real names, and I wonder what kind of corporate structure they need to have in
order to make that policy legally defensible against laws like these.

~~~
eru
> IANAL. If Facebook didn't have a headquarters in Europe (Ireland, according
> to the article), would there be any chance of Germany enforcing this?

Not sure. But if they are offering their service to Germans, and, perhaps more
important, make money from German companies via sale of advertising, there's
probably a lever for German law to act on.

------
vonuebelgarten
I don't use Facebook as people usually use but I have some accounts for API
tinkering and some groups I follow. None of them use anything near my real
name, residency, photos or other real personal data. It's a bit odd to explain
to people from some groups I meet in person why I don't use my real name on
FB, but they usually understand. There is no way for them to find this out,
since my aliases sounds naturally and the fake data also seems real.

This strategy also applies for any other social-web services.

------
alxndr
BBC story posted on HN earlier: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4937073>

------
muhu
All those big "social" networking platforms lately seem to be getting a little
bit overconfident that they can just whatever they want with their users data.
don't like the tendencies ... totalitarian on the network-side and mostly
indifferent on the user-side.

------
tomjen3
What on earth makes the Germans think that they can decide what facebook must
do?

~~~
duiker101
The fact that a company isn't more powerful than a nation and that if you want
to have German users you must follow Germany's laws?

~~~
jeltz
Especially if you also like Facebook has a German office.

------
zee007
This is the worst thing they found in facebook's term of use? Really?

~~~
gurkendoktor
No, I think this was much worse:

[http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/22/technology/facebook-
backs-...](http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/22/technology/facebook-backs-down-
on-face-recognition-in-europe.html?_r=0)

Much of what Facebook does is actually against European law, now it's down to
enforcement:

<http://europe-v-facebook.org/EN/en.html>

------
talmir
I already have a pseudonym on facebook :P I had no idea you couldnt do that.

------
jacoblyles
Does this mean that all real name services are banned in Germany?

