Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FTC Abandons Call for Stronger Privacy Laws

Posted by michael on from the laws-are-silent dept.

Anonymous Coward writes: "Found this article on CNN explaining that the FTC has decided to not seek stronger consumer privacy laws in the wake of the events of last month. The article also details how several companies broke their own privacy policies by voluntarily giving customer data to federal authorities." The NY Times has an article about this as well, with a couple of good comments from interested parties.

5 of 188 comments (clear)

  1. Another kneejerk reaction by Uttles · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "If the speech was delivered on September 10, it would have been viewed as a negative event in the privacy community," Ponemon said. "Now that it's delivered after the 11th, it's a crisis. It looks like we've lost federal government support."

    Never a more true statement than that one. It really is a shame that the end result of the terrorist attacks will be not only loss of life and property but also the loss of some important freedom. Dubya said it best himself when he said the terrorist attack was "an attack on freedom itself," and it seems as if the September 11 tragedy is only going to be used as a weapon in continued attacks.

    --

    ~ now you know
    1. Re:Another kneejerk reaction by FFFish · · Score: 5, Insightful

      One begins to suspect that the men who run Al-Qaeda -- Osama bin Laden and Ayman Al Zawahiri -- are far-seeing geniuses.

      Their goal? Bring America to its knees.

      Now, how do you best accomplish that? Well, a good start would be to lead the US Government into recanting on the values that it has always proclaimed are the heart and soul of its nation.

      Is America really America when personal privacy and personal freedoms are obliterated?

      [and at the same time, one can easily argue that this all plays nicely into the hands of 'big business,' and only serves to further the push towards globalization, which is surely the last thing any mid-East terrorist could want!]

      --

      --
      Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
  2. Who you give the info to... by Red+Aardvark+House · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From the article:

    In many cases, Ponemon said, the companies sent the information on their own initiative in order to assist the terrorism investigation. Some firms, such as airlines and car rental agencies, are breaking their privacy policies by sharing data to analyze suspicious activity.

    I'm no expert on corporate privacy policies, but isn't there some sort of force majuere clause about giving information to law-enforcement authorities under extraordinary circumstances? Unlike info sharing between companies, law enforcement will not sell the data, spam or make marketing calls during dinnertime.

    Sharing data between corporations though should be a violation of privacy, since they are not proper law-enforcement authorities.

    And what will they do with those lists when the companies are done investigating?

    --

    I like fire ants. They are very spicy!

    1. Re:Who you give the info to... by SteveM · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maybe what you say may happen, if you did something wrong. Otherwise, it's "Move along, nothing to see here".

      Perhaps you've heard of McCarthyism? If not check it out. Simply because one was suspected of associating with someone who exercised their free speech rights to support communism led to real consequences in one's life. Like loss of their job and inability to find work. Civil rights trampled to fight the red menance.

      Perhaps you are aware of the practise during world war two of rounding up American citizens of Japanese decent and putting them in interment camps. If not you should brush up on your history. Civil rights trampled because of a knee jerk reaction.

      Perhaps you've heard of J. Edgar Hoover, former director of the FBI? If not you may want to look him up. Kept files on politicians, celebraties, civil rights leaders, and more. Apparently wasn't afraid to use this info to get what he wanted. Civil rights trampled for personal power.

      Perhaps you've heard of Richard M. Nixon? If not, do a little research on something called 'Watergate'. Seens Tricky Dicky had no qualms about using any info he good get to further his political ambitions. Civil rights trampled for political power.

      Have you noticed a theme here? People who did nothing wrong suffering real consequences of those in power.

      Government is made up of humans. Humans tend to focus on their own self interest. The writers of the US constitution recognized this and did tried to build safeguards against governmental abuse of power. Because they knew power would be abused. So they built in the checks and balances of three branches of government. And they penned the bill of rights to limit what government could do to individuals.

      Now we again have calls for restrictions on civil liberties. I'm sure that the people asking for them believe that they are doing the right thing. They have a job to do and they want to do it well. They, like you, feel that those who have done nothing wrong have nothing to fear.

      As the examples above show, they are wrong.

      I believe it was Ben Franklin who once said, "Those who trade liberty for security wind up with neither."

      I'm not willing to trade.

      And yes, I know people directly impacted by the events of 9/11/02001.

      Steve M

  3. Re:the real reason nobody likes this by Tackhead · · Score: 5, Interesting
    > 99.99% of the population is probably doing something illegal fairly regularly.

    "Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against - then you'll know that this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it. There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens' What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."

    p.411, Ayn Rand, ATLAS SHRUGGED, Signet Books, NY, 1957

    Reposted under what I believe in good faith to be fair use.