Closeted Lesbian Sues Netflix
In a law suit, Doe v. Netflix, lesbian "Jane Doe" alleges that the popular video rental company violated fair-trade laws and a federal privacy law that pertains to video rental records.
Wired.com is reporting:
An in-the-closet lesbian mother is suing Netflix for privacy invasion, alleging the movie rental company made it possible for her to be outed when it disclosed insufficiently anonymous information about nearly half-a-million customers as part of its $1 million contest to improve its recommendation system.
In order to get a better movie recommendation algorithm, the online DVD rental company gave more than 50,000 Netflix Prize contestants two massive datasets. The first included 100 million movie ratings, along with the date of the rating, a unique ID number for the subscriber, and the movie info. Based on this data from 480,000 customers, contestants had to come up with a recommendation algorithm that could predict 10 percent better than Netflix how those same subscribers rated other movies.
But video records count among the most privacy protected records in the U.S. — a reaction to a reporter getting Supreme Court–nominee Robert Bork’s records from a video store. The lead attorney on the new suit, Joseph Malley, recently reached a multimillion-dollar settlement with Facebook over its failed Beacon program, which drew fire in part for sharing users’ Blockbuster rentals with their friends.
The complaint calls that the Brokeback Mountain factor, arguing that marketers will suck up the data, combine it with other data sets and start pigeon-holing people into marketing categories, based on assumptions about the movies they rated.
That’s why the lesbian mom joined the lawsuit as a Jane Doe, according to the complaint, since she believes that “were her sexual orientation public knowledge, it would negatively affect her ability to pursue her livelihood and support her family and would hinder her and her children’s ability to live peaceful lives.”
Comments [47]
For the record, I just did an
For the record, I just did an informal survey of Gay & Lesbian titles on Netflix. Quite a few of them are unrated, no doubt because so many are independent films and have not been submitted to the MPAA, but quite a few of them are also PG-13 (nearly equal to the number of R's). This idea that gay content automatically garners a R rating is outdated. The MPAA changes it's criteria on a regular basis to keep up with the times. Example- the F word used to get you an automatic R rating. These days it can be used once in a non-sexual way (as an adjective or expletive as opposed to a verb) and the film will still get a PG-13 rating. Assuming there aren't other factors that push it to R.
Also, R rated movies used to do worse at the box office than PG so movie producers used to avoid them. These days R rated movies do a lot more business than they used to so some producers try for it. This will naturally lead to more R rated film releases than we saw 10 or 20 years ago. Also, movies that couldn't get PG before now get PG-13, which is a very desirable rating from a ticket sales standpoint.
Become a fan of "Sodomy: The Musical" on Facebook!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Sodomy-The-Musical/302006935414
seriously?
The column got too skinny so I'll just post this at the top of the thread to say I'm sick of folks without kids criticizing "lazy parents." The fact that I'd like a head's up does not make me or any other parent "lazy." That is beyond insulting. Wanting a ratings system does not mean I am ceding any authority over my kids to the goverment. Again if you don't like the ratings — ignore them.
And as a matter of fact, I've been taking the grandkids to the movies since they were 2. They keep their mouths shut; they don't get up to go to the bathroom, and they don't whine about wanting snacks. They're better mannered than about 75% of the so-called adults in the theater.
"When you look for the bad in mankind expecting to find it, you surely will." ~ Pollyanna
Totally agree on the laziness issue.
And thank you for giving your grand kids, and I presume your own kids, some home-training. Whether they know it or not, the whole community reaps the benefits.
I vote yes...
for manners!
@kdhales
And if my post wasn't clear
And if my post wasn't clear enough Rusty let me just say that I am quite certain you are not one of those 'lazy parents' and that I certainly did not mean to suggest that because someone uses the ratings system to help them choose movies that does not automatically make them lazy. In fact, I think I was pretty clear that it's a tool that can be used or abused.
I used to work for a large telecommunications company and we used to handle complaints about 900#s on a regular basis. I had to listen to a lot of parents tell me about how it was our responsibility to stop their kids from calling those numbers. Well, blocks are available to folks who want them and other than that while it may not be possible to police your children 24/7 (in fact, I'm certain it's impossible) you certainly can teach your children what is acceptable and what is not and raise them to respect the boundaries that you place on them. I never would have called a 900# when I was a kid, because of how I was raised.
Having said that. There are an awful lot of lazy parents out there. We've all seen them.
Become a fan of "Sodomy: The Musical" on Facebook!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Sodomy-The-Musical/302006935414
Wild Idea
She could go out and work for a living!
Okay, I don't get it.
I've never rented a movie from Netflix. What kind of 'personal' info must one disclose to rent Gone With the Wind ? And, why would someone disclose such a personal thing when they're in the closet...
Actually...
When you rent or purchase online, you give the retailer quite a bit of information (name, address, telephone, credit card or bank information, at minimum). For movie rentals, most places also want your date of birth, and many require your DL/ID number. That's just enough for identity theft to occur, if the information ends up in the wrong hands.
Add to that the titles of your movie rentals, especially adult oriented content, and one can tell quite a bit about you that you may not want becoming general knowledge under certain circumstances. "Jane Doe" compounded the problem by participating in rating the movies, and then NetFlix took that data and gave it to 50,000 others (without anyone's permission). If "Jane Doe" is not only a mom, but also holds a "public trust" type job (teacher, cop, doctor, etc), the consequences can be tragic. If she's in the military, she could actually be prosecuted under DADT, depending on what she rented.
Here's the rule of thumb: Anything you don't want others to know, don't tell anyone online or in writing, ever. Once it's out there, pretty much everyone will get access at some point.
I have a Netflix account and
I have a Netflix account and am familiar with the contest in question so let me clarify a few things:
1. Netflix didn't ask me for my driver's license number. Name, address & credit card number. Age to verify that I was over 18.
2. The contestants were given rating info & a unique identifier number for the renter. The only way that I can imagine them linking that to a particular renter is if Netflix released actual account numbers which I'm pretty sure I read they did not and honestly I can't imagine them doing because it would be an incredibly stupid business decision.
3. Netflix doesn't rent x-rated films.
So, if I was included in the sample Netflix probably gave the contestants an ID# that Netflix would be able to relate back to my account and some of my movie ratings. Netflix gives me recommendations based upon my ratings of other movies I've watched and they use a mathematical algorithm to figure out those recommendations.
The contest was to come up with a better algorithm. They wouldn't really need to release any personal information for a math geek to look at my movie ratings and make an algorithm to calculate how I would rate one movie based on how I rated others.
Become a fan of "Sodomy: The Musical" on Facebook!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Sodomy-The-Musical/302006935414
Actually...
LGBT oriented films are typically rated "R," and as such considered adult oriented material.
My understanding about the claims being made in the case is that NetFlix, while using a random sampling of renters for their data pool, did not use a random sampling of ratings data for each renter selected, but instead used ALL data submitted by the individual renters.
It was the inclusion of all ratings data that theoretically is cause for concern, especially given the large number of "contestants" involved (the larger that group, the higher the chance of something creepy being done with the data), none of whom were under direct control of NetFlix as to how that data was used, to prevent something untoward from happening.
Add to that NetFlix failed to even consider obtaining permission to use that data in such a way, though I'm sure they have as part of the TOS contract the right to do whatever they want (within reason) with the data. It would have been better for NetFlix to get said permission first, at least from a moral standpoint.
While I consider it unlikely that "Jane Doe" faces any significant risk of being "outed" by what happened, there is still that chance, given the circumstances.
It wouldn't make sense for
It wouldn't make sense for Netflix to release all ratings data for a given user because then they'd have no way to judge the accuracy of the submisssions.
For example, if I've rated 100 LGBT films and Netflix wants to predict how accurately a mathematical algorithm can predict my rating of other LGBT films then they need to release only some percentage of those 100 ratings so they will ultimately be able to compare the prediction to my actual rating. So, the only logical course of action is to release a significant percentage of my ratings data and then use the contest submission to see how well it predicted my actual rating of the remaining films.
For the record- I don't, and I don't think most people do, consider R-rated movies 'adult oriented'. I would need to do some research to see if LGBT films automatically get the R. That probably was true at one point but may not be now.
Become a fan of "Sodomy: The Musical" on Facebook!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Sodomy-The-Musical/302006935414
What would make sense?
The idea is to come up with an algorithm using real world data from a random population sample. In this case, the data involves personal perceptions, and the algorithm wanted is on how to predict and market to those perceptions.
In the example you provided, if all you have rated and rented were LGBT films, no algorithm would be needed to predict the likelihood that you would find other films from that genre of interest. Now, throw in data that includes not just LGBT, but SciFi, children's films ("Jane Doe" is a mother), some well done dramas, and a bit of help from a computer may be necessary to properly market certain materials to you, based on what you've rented and how you've rated those rentals.
And, for the record, most people I know from around the nation consider "R" rated to be material oriented towards adults, hence why those under 17 aren't permitted into "R" rated movies or to rent "R" rated movies without an adult present to give consent (which is also the law). And, even today, LGBT materials almost always get an "R" rating, even documentaries. Had WB edited out the sex scene between Gershon and Tilly, the movie Bound would have gotten a PG-13 rating, despite the violence and language. That was in 1996. This year, the documentary Outrage (about the hypocrisy of closeted public figures who campaign against LGBT rights) got an "R" rating. No sex, no violence, in fact even the language used was fairly tame, when compared to some of the crap that gets rated "PG13." But, because it addressed a serious LGBT issue, and because it had actual (heaven forbid) gays in it, it got an "R" rating.
So, yes, the "R" rating is still applied to even materials that would otherwise be rated "G" were it not for the fact that it dealt with LGBT issues.
Oh, and I was just using LGBT
Oh, and I was just using LGBT films as an example. Not in any way even remotely suggesting that someone would or should use only my ratings of those films as a way to determine how I would rate other films. Just trying to make a point. I thought it would be easier for other folks who aren't familiar with the contest or how Netflix works to understand my post that way.
Become a fan of "Sodomy: The Musical" on Facebook!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Sodomy-The-Musical/302006935414
There is no law regarding
There is no law regarding film ratings. The MPAA is an organization created and run by Hollywood as a way to provide guidance to parents and others who might want to restrict what they or their children see. Not only is the MPAA not a legal body, no film is required to be submitted for a rating. It is entirely voluntary.
Become a fan of "Sodomy: The Musical" on Facebook!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Sodomy-The-Musical/302006935414
But will it get shown?
The question is, how many theatres will show an unrated movie?
A lot won't show unrated
A lot won't show unrated movies. A lot won't show NC-17 so that rating has become box office death. In fact, I've only seen 2 NC-17 movies, the first two ever if I remember correctly: "Henry & June" and "The Cook, the Thief, his Wife & her Lover". Two more completely disparate movies you couldn't possibly imagine. So, I'd have to agree with Skate that relying on ratings is just lazy parenting. I personally wouldn't have a problem with a kid who was old enough to know about sex watching "Henry & June" but I wouldn't subject an adult to TCTTHW&HL. Slow roasted penis isn't really my thing though.
Become a fan of "Sodomy: The Musical" on Facebook!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Sodomy-The-Musical/302006935414
Now that you mention that, I
Now that you mention that, I think I recall hearing that before. Wild. Typical though.
SIDE RANT ABOUT RATINGS (not related to Netflix topic; move on if you wish :))
I feel it's insane that a rating system even exists, and looking to ratings to make decisions about what one (or one's children) should or shouldn't watch is crazy. I have this weird idea that people have something called personal judgement, which they can employ to make all kinds of fancy decisions for themselves
. I have no idea why others look to strangers to make these kinds of decisions for them, or why they think that strangers' views on such things are more valid/legit/trustworthy than their own. Parents not having time is a crazy excuse, because that's too small a reason to give up such an important freedom. They can't possibly pre-watch every movie their kid wants to see, but who cares? If a kid has a meaningful, worthwhile life, I don't think seeing some "bad" movies is going to shake their tree to any significant degree. Anyone who has kids, feel free to chap my ass here 
.
In my massive extended family, with all the kids running around, nobody has ever mentioned these ratings. My parents and relatives let us read/watch/etc. whatever we wanted as kids. There were too many of us anyway, and if you watched something that creeped you out, it was your problem. It's the same for the current kids in my family.
While I would not (if I had
While I would not (if I had kids) let them just read or watch anything they wanted to and tough shit if what they watched scarred them for life- I do agree that the ratings system is an extremely flawed and highly subjective system. Considering what it replaced though- The Hays Code- it is an improvement. Under Will Hays' code sex, violence, drug use, etc could not even be hinted at. The Hays Code is what gave us married couples sleeping in twin beds, babies that appeared from out of nowhere, bad guys getting shot & dying without a single drop of blood being shed. Watch "The Aviator" for an interesting scene where Howard Hughes bucks the code to bring us cleavage. More info on that (true censorship) here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hayes_code
For a very interesting documentary about the MPAA and their ridiculous secretiveness see "This Film is Not Yet Rated". More info on that here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Film_Is_Not_Yet_Rated
Become a fan of "Sodomy: The Musical" on Facebook!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Sodomy-The-Musical/302006935414
Thanks, I have not heard of
Thanks, I have not heard of the Hayes Code and will look it up.
If someone - het or homo -
If someone - het or homo - is getting ass fucked while snorting coke in a movie I'd like to know that before I take the grandkids thanks. If you want to ignore ratings with your kids be my guest.
"When you look for the bad in mankind expecting to find it, you surely will." ~ Pollyanna
Multiplexes...
I've never understood how 'multiplexes' get away with not supervising which movies children are allowed to see...Sure, they're not supposed to see R movies without parents, etc.. but, they just walk in. No one stops them. They buy a G rated ticket, then go into any theatre that they want to.
Multiplexes should be required to watch who enters each screen, and check tickets.... If there's 12 screens, there should be 12 employee's watching each door for kids going from movie to movie...
Well, it sort of points out
Well, it sort of points out the ridiculousness in trying to micromanage people's lives anyway. If people changed their thinking, and realized that it is actually their job to interact with their children, raise them, and determine what sorts of situations they want their kids to be in or not be in, they would stop looking to outside agencies (businesses, etc) to manage what their kids see or don't see.
And besides, I'm not convinced that the crap that passes as G is any less insidious than the stuff that's R. Things that are marketed to children today are insane. For example, they have girls' pants that have words written on the seat of the pants, and this is considered normal and acceptable by the soccer mom set, and by mainstream culture as a whole.
I do ignore ratings. Be my
I do ignore ratings. Be my guest to give them creedence.
You wouldn't get that
You wouldn't get that information from a rating.
You don't think that might
You don't think that might warrant an NC - 17 for sex and drugs?
"An NC-17 rated motion picture is one that, in the view of the Rating Board, most parents would consider patently too adult for their children 17 and under. No children will be admitted. NC-17 does not mean “obscene” or “pornographic” in the common or legal meaning of those words, and should not be construed as a negative judgment in any sense. The rating simply signals that the content is appropriate only for an adult audience. An NC-17 rating can be based on violence, sex, aberrational behavior, drug abuse or any other element that most parents would consider too strong and therefore off-limits for viewing by their children."
Like I said - take your kids to see anything you want.
"When you look for the bad in mankind expecting to find it, you surely will." ~ Pollyanna
No, since it says the rating
No, since it says the rating "can" be based on violence, sex, etc., and we've already established the subjectivity of the rating system.
Then again, I don't care if they give such a movie a G rating and make it available in every theatre of the country, because again, I would say that the responsibility of making these kinds of judgements is best left in the hands of the viewer. Parents can make these decisions, and I don't think the Ratings Board is just such a nice group of people that they want to be helpful and provide parents with the best info possible out of the kindness of their hearts. I can't think of a single instance in which these "rating board"-type groups have been used for any other purpose than censorship and the promotion of an agenda that benefits a few.
I put no stock in any kind of rating, I do not think that these things make children any safer and better off, and I in fact think that lots of sketchy legislation, rules, "measures," etc. are ushered in under the guise of "Oh my god, PROTECT THE CHILDREN!"
** Keep the kids at home **
When I'm in a theatre watching a 'mature' movie, I prefer to not listen to the giggling of little kids, or the 'whaaaaaa, when is it gonna be over' ranting of restless children... If not for any other reason, perhaps being polite is a good reason to leave the rug rats at home with a babysitter - not in the theatre, when adults are watching adult/mature movies.
Just a thought.....
Yup!
I hate it when I see my grade school kids at adult movies.
You may hate it, and it is
You may hate it, and it is irritating to listen to people making noise during a movie, but is that a good reason to hand over responsibilities (and therefore freedoms) to someone else? Not that you said that, but I'm posing the question (to you or others who want to chime in).
Suggestion
For the most part, ratings are suggestions. You can get just about anyone into a movie if you want to. And you can show your kids anything you want to in the privacy of your own home, or your mini van for that matter. Some people would like an general idea of what the movie may contain without having to go once by themselves before they take their kids to see it. If you have a broader sense of what might be appropriate for your children than what these guidelines use, then just take that into account, or disregard them altogether. But I think it is unnecessarily judgmental to look down on those who find the ratings valuable.
On another note, you do have every right to do whatever you want with your kids as long as it isn't abusive. For that matter, given our social services system, quite a few things that are abusive, perhaps over a lenghty period. But as one who often has young children asking questions in class about things that they saw over the weekend, or late on a school night, and found disturbing, I would suggest that you not necessarily do it just because you can.
Well....
I guess I look at it like this. For the most part, ratings are simply guidelines... A minor child can enter a theatre where a movie is rated R if they are accompanied by an adult, or guardian. Thus, placing the responsibility on the guardian, instead of the theatre.
Whether we agree with it or not, society does set standards for age related appropriateness in several areas. For the most part it is to protect children, and yes it would be wonderful if parents would do the 'protecting', because it is ultimately a parents responsibility to do so - but, we know that doesn't happen.
If that was, in fact the case - if parents always did the right thing, we wouldn't need laws concerning the selling of alcohol to minors - or laws about children smoking - or laws concerning children attending school - or age related laws setting the standard concerning when children can drive automobiles. There are times when societies standards trump what we may feel is a parent, or for that matter, a child's right.
I agree with you completely
I agree with you completely (and I cannot emphasize the word completely enough) that it is a parents responsibility to monitor what their kids see, read, etc. I would argue though that the ratings system is not an imposition on our freedoms but rather a tool that parents can choose to use (and to what degree) or to ignore. The greater threat to our freedom to see what we want is the theaters who refuse to show NC-17 or unrated movies or stores that refuse to sell certain content.
If I lived in Bumfuck Kansas and Walmart was my only option for buying music, movies, etc and they wouldn't sell me an NC-17 movie (or Sheryl Crow's second album because she references kids buying guns at Walmart) then that is an imposition on my personal freedom. The fact that the movie is rated or that the CD comes with a parental warning is just something I can choose to listen to or ignore.
Become a fan of "Sodomy: The Musical" on Facebook!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Sodomy-The-Musical/302006935414
Mi 2 cents
I think the ratings system is basically a crock and should be scrapped. I also think people should leave the rugrats at home for a movie with a mature theme. People who can't shut up during the movie should stay home too.
Civility is not a sign of weakness.
I believe
gay and lesbian titles are considered "adult" content.
I'm not quite sure of how this law suit worked and how Lez Doe was/would be potentially outed by it. but in agreeing with the sentiments on this thread, yes it sucks to be in the closet, but until the law totally protects us (nodding to CAMW up there) ENDA and everything else -- we are still targets for discrimination and i can sympathize with Doe's fears -- though I refuse to share them.
tweet tweet @gracemoon
Adult according to who? When
Adult according to who? When I search Netflix for titles they come up under gay/lesbian but also under comedy, drama, etc. I have not seen a seperate adult heading and I don't think that's the point of this lawsuit. Not much detail here but my guess would be that she's rented a lot of dyke movies and feels that having that info revealed will out her.
Also, I thought CMW only brought up porn as a comparison of how your personal proclivities can be revealed by your video renting habits.
Become a fan of "Sodomy: The Musical" on Facebook!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Sodomy-The-Musical/302006935414
Porn?
I didn't mention porn, I mentioned adult oriented movies, vastly different. Most consider "R" rated to be adult oriented.
Porn?
Where is the porn reference? I see adult content. It's kind of like boots and shoes. While porn is certainly adult content, adult content is not necessarily porn.
Did you think CMW meant that
Did you think CMW meant that people would judge you based on your R-rated movie rentals? When we're talking entertainment the term adult content is often used as a euphemism for porn. I don't think I misread her intent with that phrase but if I did I would appreciate clarification.
Become a fan of "Sodomy: The Musical" on Facebook!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Sodomy-The-Musical/302006935414
Oh boy did you misread it
For me, adult-oriented content refers to ANY content deemed inappropriate for those who are not adults (children). Generally, as a rule, I consider a rating of "R" or higher to be adult-oriented. Schindler's List has an "R" rating, but I don't think there is anyone who would consider that porn, though the content is definitely adult in nature.
And, yes, people can and do judge others, often. If they can base it on a part of the Bible they themselves do not adhere to, what's to stop them from passing judgment on others based on their movie rental habits? I remember going to the showing of Jesus Christ Superstar as a child. People actually followed us out of the theater, taking our pictures, and writing down my grandfather's license plate number.
A few weeks later, someone burned a cross on his front lawn.
You would be amazed just how far those who hate are willing to go to achieve their agenda.
Queer
Given the current topic, and the fact that I have never seen porn listed on NetFlix, I assumed she meant queer content, though it could also be applied to anything with sex, violence, or other mature themes. My question for you was really aimed at clarifying if there was a comment, or part there of, that I missed, not mincing words.
I guess we'll have to se.
I guess we'll have to se. What CMW meant by the phrase sine I interpreted it differently. She did say she's not a Netflix subscriber so it's possible she doesn't know they don't rent porn.
Become a fan of "Sodomy: The Musical" on Facebook!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Sodomy-The-Musical/302006935414
Sorry for the delay in clarification
but weather has been a serious issue for me the last three days.
And, yes, I knew NetFlix doesn't rent porn, which I assumed was common knowledge.
Are you typing on your iPhone
Are you typing on your iPhone again?
Oh brother.
Is this why the whole "friends" thing on Netflix disappeared? I believe you could opt out to share your information with your friends, though, if she was outed she did it herself.
While coming out is a highly personal thing, I have no sympathy for her.
www.carollani.com/wordpress
@carollani
www.gaynation.posterous.com
Seems to me that the legal
Seems to me that the legal question is if the contestants could have ID'd Netflix subscribers using the info provided. If not, then she just outed herself by filing the suit.
Become a fan of "Sodomy: The Musical" on Facebook!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Sodomy-The-Musical/302006935414
Depends on who she is, where
Depends on who she is, where she lives, and what she does for a living, but I can see it. Personally, if I were in that situation I would probably get a different job and move so my kids wouldn't see me hiding who I am. Then again, in this economy it could be more of an issue than usual.
I also think in many ways our country is becoming more hateful rather than less, and in some ways the actual risk involved with being out is increasing. Just last night, I witnessed a bunch of drunken frat boys threatening to show a lesbian and her girlfriend what real men could do for them. Not that that's anything new, but when the political bullshit that is spinning out there is allowed to continue without a loud and determined push back from high officials on the other side, people feel enabled to go further than they otherwise might. And let's face it, when the president claims to be our ally and then says we aren't actually equal, over and over, it doesn't help.
“were her sexual orientation
“were her sexual orientation public knowledge, it would negatively affect her ability to pursue her livelihood and support her family and would hinder her and her children’s ability to live peaceful lives.”
Wow, I feel bad for her that she has to live her life in fear like that.
"Fight Prime Time. Read a Book"