Chat: shouldn't do proactive enforcement unilaterally

Raw text

Transcribed text as recorded, including headers and formatting fragments.

Message From: Rob Sherman [/O=THEFACEBOOK/OU=EXTERNAL (FYDIBOHF25SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=████] Sent: 12/1/2020 5:24:13 AM To: Shavi ████@fb.com]; Michel Protti ████@fb.com]; Vladimir ████@fb.com]; Nathan Davis ████@fb.com]; Tom ████@fb.com]; Rob Sherman ████@fb.com] Subject: Message summary [{"otherUserFbId":null,"threadFbId":3397293710377612}] Michel John Tristan Protti (11/30/2020 15:40:19 PST): >Also, for presentation, is idea shavi does pages 3 and 5, Rob does India overview and Tom does youth? Robert Michael Sherman (11/30/2020 16:21:21 PST): >We talked with them a year ago about youth issues, which was when we had the discussion around age verification. One takeaway from that was that we should begin advocating for platform-level/industry-level solutions as opposed to FB "owning" it entirely. We've been advocating for this and have gotten some traction but (1) the feedback has been that FB *also* has to do work on this rather than just advocate to push it off to others, and (2) the next step is to put together a spec with more detail on what this would look like. Probably worth calling out the OS/platform level verification as a piece of the work we are doing centrally. Robert Michael Sherman (11/30/2020 16:22:11 PST): >The broader takeaway was that we shouldn't do proactive enforcement unilaterally / without everyone else having to do that, and we should revisit in a year to see where we are. So that's partially what we are doing. Robert Michael Sherman (11/30/2020 16:22:17 PST): >Fine with me Shavi (11/30/2020 16:24:26 PST): >@Rob Is the YouTube work on age verification in EU worth calling out (in voice over), We dont know about India specific plans from other competitors yet. Robert Michael Sherman (11/30/2020 16:36:42 PST): >Yes, that's a good one. I don't think anyone HAS India plans on this yet - it's literally a line in a law that says you have to verify age, and if you ask them what that means they say that the regulator will figure it out. Robert Michael Sherman (11/30/2020 16:36:54 PST): >The point is that we should figure it out before they do, so our approach is the model Robert Michael Sherman (11/30/2020 16:37:09 PST): >Also - I shared the deck with Claire and she's going to send you a few specific comments on the youth piece Michel John Tristan Protti (11/30/2020 16:50:09 PST): >Can we try and get pre-read out soon-ish? Shavi can you send? Shavi (11/30/2020 16:52:03 PST): >@Tom we have few blanks on slide 13. Post which I think we can send. I am happy to send. Thomas Jude (11/30/2020 16:53:47 PST): >I will complete before 6pm. Rob, are ████ comments in there? Robert Michael Sherman (11/30/2020 16:54:36 PST): >Not sure - shavi, did you connect w/ her yet? If not, do you mind just reaching out? Robert Michael Sherman (11/30/2020 16:54:48 PST): >She only had 3-4 small edits Shavi (11/30/2020 17:01:15 PST): >I havent. @Tom was working on Youth slide. Most of the content is from Claire's slide. I can ping her now. Vladimir (11/30/2020 17:03:05 PST): >Agreed - we have also not done any of the EBDP work and that can easily take a lot of their bandwidht Thomas Jude (11/30/2020 19:11:26 PST): >EBDP has youth stuff in it :-) Vladimir (11/30/2020 19:54:47 PST): >True - I meant other SCD and consent requirements. [Handwritten exhibit sticker: EXHIBIT / Sherman / 15] CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL META3047MDL-047-00967760 METAMAAG-017-01464669 PLTF EX-07966_0001 Thomas Jude (11/30/2020 20:06:49 PST): >I know. But to this point, we should present Youth as thematic issue that is common to many forthcoming regulations, either as specific youth regulations or as a fundamental component of general privacy regulations. This has been the case as much previously. essentially, most forthcoming privacy legislation has a youth component. Vladimir (11/30/2020 20:08:13 PST): >Yes - the key point we wanted to make with Youth is that we want another team to potentially take point on key parts of it Vladimir (11/30/2020 20:09:15 PST): >Currently the narrative on why we picked those two issues (youth and india) isn't clear - so we will have to talk to it Thomas Jude (11/30/2020 20:09:17 PST): >Yes. Most of it is in CPP and ABP. There are implications to sharing defaults that are FB app and IG specific. Shavi (11/30/2020 20:10:00 PST): >Tom Nathan and I discussed getting 30 min tomorrow morning to talk through deck together as a team, Vlad Michel and Rob it's hard to align all calendars but I would include you on the invite. Shavi (11/30/2020 20:10:47 PST): >Since we mostly did this deck async, it will be helpful to find sometime to talk through some of these key points we want to land with the audience tomorrow. Shavi Goel (11/30/2020 20:11:47 PST): >Vlad I agree with your point that why India and Youth isn't coming through clearly. It's in part those are two areas we have clear burning platform and most clarity on what work we need to do. Shavi (11/30/2020 20:13:03 PST): >The overall prioritization across all obligations was based on enforcement risk, current compliance gap assessment and opportunity to shape the law. India is high on all three Shavi (11/30/2020 20:14:37 PST): >Youth is a combination of many different laws which are medium to high enforcement risk, High on mismatch between compliance and current practices and high on policy opportunity to shape upcoming IDPC and ICO guidelines Michel John Tristan Protti (11/30/2020 21:12:23 PST): >I can't make the 9am synch tomorrow but critical for us to be aligned on the specific asks of product teams we'll make. Michel John Tristan Protti (11/30/2020 21:12:42 PST): >Let me know where you land at 9 Shavi (11/30/2020 21:18:07 PST): >Slide 9 and 13 have our current asks. Michel, Vladimir Fedorov do have any concerns or flags on these? Much of this was Tom, Nathan and I taking our best guesses on which product team should drive this work, we would love your feedback. Shavi (11/30/2020 21:20:59 PST): >Also, does the group has any context around the federated leadership and ownership around reg response? This is another area Vlad shared some input about make more crisper in the room. Vladimir (11/30/2020 21:21:28 PST): >I am not sure if we are immediately ready to absorb a person from each PG on India Vladimir (11/30/2020 21:21:39 PST): >Should we make it Jan 1st ask? Vladimir (11/30/2020 21:23:46 PST): >For slide 13 - the asks are good but I think slide portrays more alignment than there is Vladimir (11/30/2020 21:23:56 PST): >I fully expect Shultz to disagree Shavi (11/30/2020 21:24:13 PST): >Agree. Also we can clarify that this might be more phased, starting with FOAs and ABP first, before adding Integrity, CCT or other PG reps. CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL META3047MDL-047-00967761 METAMAAG-017-01464670 PLTF EX-07966_0002 METAMAAG-017-01464669 Metadata All Custodians: Protti_Michael; Attachment Count: 0 Begin Family: METAMAAG-017-01464669 Confidentiality: CONFIDENTIAL Date Sent: 2020/11/30 9:24 pm End Family: METAMAAG-017-01464670 PLTF EX-07966_0003