-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 63
Re-attribute Yahoo/AOL/Oath trackers from Verizon to Yahoo Inc #1179
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Changes from all commits
e958dc7
5006c58
9da5a32
6471dbc
59d664e
a2dedd8
1ab5095
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@ | ||
| name: Yahoo | ||
| website_url: https://www.yahooinc.com/ | ||
| privacy_policy_url: https://legal.yahoo.com/us/en/yahoo/privacy/index.html | ||
| privacy_contact: dpo-contact@yahooinc.com | ||
| country: US | ||
| description: Yahoo Inc. is an American media and technology company whose brands include Yahoo, AOL, and Yahoo Advertising (formerly Oath / Verizon Media). | ||
|
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Just noticed that AOL was also sold now to Bending Spoons: I would recommend to leave out AOL here in the description. But it means also that the AOL entries will move to Bending Spoons. Currently, I see no Bending Spoons organization file. Either we keep the aol_* patterns for now at yahoo and do it in a next step, or you could add a organization entry for bending_spoons.eno in this PR and use it. |
||
|
|
||
| --- notes | ||
| Yahoo and AOL were combined as Oath Inc. in 2017 after Verizon acquired Yahoo; Oath was renamed Verizon Media in 2019. In 2021 Verizon sold 90% of the media business to funds managed by Apollo Global Management and it was renamed Yahoo Inc. The Yahoo, AOL and Oath brand patterns and their acquisitions are therefore re-attributed from the `verizon` organization to Yahoo Inc. | ||
|
|
||
| Sources: | ||
| * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahoo_Inc._(2017%E2%80%93present) | ||
| * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verizon_Media | ||
| * https://www.apollo.com/insights-news/pressreleases/2021/09/apollo-funds-complete-acquisition-of-yahoo-161530593 | ||
| --- notes | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In addition to the
privacy_policy_urlis also aprivacy_contactfield (please compare with other organization files).There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks, added
privacy_contactfield.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do you recall where you found the privacy contact? Looks like they handle it differently for each region. In the US version of the privacy policy that linked, I did not spot it.
I see one only in the EU version (https://legal.yahoo.com/ie/en/yahoo/privacy/index.html)
dpo-contact@yahooinc.com
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
My mistake, the email I originally used looks like it's from their employee/contractor privacy policy. I've updated this PR to include the contact from the EU version dpo-contact@yahooinc.com.
Their US privacy policy links another email also in section 14(c), but unsure if we should use as its an external GDPR rep rather than their internal DPO.
Let me know what is best practice here as to what email and privacy policy to include, or if their US privacy policy + DPO email is sufficient.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is sometimes indeed confusing. Some companies have no email contact at all.
There is no hard rule, but most important is that if we include one that it does exist (which is the case here). Otherwise, it trying to find the best match if there conflicting options.
It is an uncommon example here to have the US privacy policy and the EU GDPR contact, but I think it makes sense. For a US company, I would also take the US privacy policy as the canonical source. And since it lacks a better option, going for the EU privacy contact address makes sense, since it is a email that at least explicitly exists to reach the privacy contact.