Slashdot Mirror
Vermont Goes Opt-In, Corps Unhappy
jeffy124 writes: "Beginning Feb 15, a new Vermont consumer protection law takes effect requiring companies doing business with people in VT to require opt-in before they can sell/share that customer's personal information. Naturally, companies aren't happy, and trade groups are suing the state, claiming the law will raise costs of doing business and hurt consumers."
What kind of legal actions are available for consumers who have been targeted by corporations who choose to violate opt-in laws? Does this apply to only coporations within state?
:)
Yes, maybe I should do my research, but I'm busy doing research for other things. Maybe I shouldn't be wasting my time here too!
-- I'll cut you up so bad, you'll wish I'd never cut you up so bad!
oddly i am in a whole bunch of "opt-in" solicitation services who send me bungloads of email everyday. i dont recall opting in fFor a single one of them, but that sure hasn't stopped them.
Raises Costs: Sounds like they view easy profits as an entitlement, and expect the state to pass corporate welfare legislation rather than consumer protection legislation.
Hurts Consumers: Mebe we should ask the consumers about this instead? (Why the heck do they suppose the legislature passed the law in the first place?)
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
When I got my phone connected, they mis-spelt my last name. I have never seen my last name spelt like that ANYWHERE else. /var/log/messages
// my place of work) were related?
I am in charge of our mail server at work (Slackware 8 beast running sendmail, squid, mysql, imap, etc...). Recently I did the following search:
grep unknown
I was surprised to see my an error message regarding an unknown user, which consisted of my first initial, and last name - MIS-SPELT exactly as Telstra had, @mycompany.com.au. So someone obviously got my first & last names from Telstra. They informed my that 'anyone' can get this from the phone book or http://www.whitepages.com.au. Fair enough. But how did they link it to my place of work? Telstra swear that they don't have any record of where I (or anyone else) work. So is this Australia Post, ASIO, or what? I make a point of NOT telling people where I work, as I understand that if this information gets into the wrong hands, people can make life 'difficult' for you.
Any thought on how these 2 (Telstra's records of my name
they are completely different beasts, though. 1) Most of the mail sent to me snail-mail is at least somewhat targeted. I am a college student, therefore they assume that I want to get myself thousands of dollars in debt with high rate everyone-accepted credit cards. I also get things such as coupons and stuff for local businesses. The reason they target more in snail mail is because it costs them to send the mail. I doubt a 13 year old would want advertisements for a credit card (or my dog.. though it has gotten some), since they can't use it. Therefore, companies don't send them. It boosts the signal to noise ratio, and sometimes might hit on something i'm interested in.
Email, however, there's no costs. You type up a message, often poorly spelled, buy/spider a list of emails, and click send. No targeting (usually). They don't care. Thus, the signal to noise ratio is much higher. I've gotten exactly two emails that I felt targeted any interests of mine. I read them, I visited the site. I didn't purchase since they weren't something I was looking for at the time. I've also received hundreds of "watch me masturbate" emails, stuff I don't want, etc. Once they start paying to send emails (more than just bandwidth), then they can argue equal treatment.
Over hear in the land of the unfree we already have these protections. We also have some other consumer protections that might be worth having
1) They can't sell your data unless you let them (two whole tick boxes)
2) The data isn't considered a company asset when the
And as for hurting consumers.... bollocks, totally and utter. Reducing SPAM, being in control of your own information. Hell this _is_ what consumers want.
Go Vermont, full credit to some law makers who aren't just in the pockets of big business.
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
The population of the whole state is 575,000 people, about the same as Nashville Tenn. With this and other pain in the a$$ laws many businesses will decide the tiny population is not worth the trouble. Any regulation has a cost, that cost is not going to be paid out of corporate profits it will be paid by consumers
Free cell phone tracking
I work for a Worldwide Telecommunications business, and they sell all of thier lists... The interesting part is when your national, and this law applies only to Virginia we will have to opt-out everyone only in Virginia. So that makes it a tad more difficult.. Considering half the time the state information we have for the customer is old, or out of date, or deliberatly inaccurate. despite the extra work this will generate however I think it is a good idea. Personally I jsut wish it was the whole US instead of just Virginia.
Am I lying when I tell you that im telling the truth? Or am I telling the truth when I say that Im lying?
Wow, it amazes me that the companies will publicly go to court to try to force themselves on people.
I only recently learned that my bank was selling my personal information. When I tried to opt-out, I discovered that they have a difficult procedure to do so. Also, I have three accounts, and they expect me to opt-out of each one separately, even though it is the same information.
I would boycott any company that goes to court against opt-in.
Notice the Sybase ad next to the Computerworld article. Will that sell Sybase products, or damage Sybase by annoying potential customers? The overall reality is that companies are often self-destructive in the way they interact with people.
--
Links to respected news sources show that U.S. government policy contributed to terrorism: What should be the Response to Violence?
Bush's education improvements were
We in Norway have had this for quite some time, and it works well. Apart from your typical "MAKE $$$$ FAST" and "INCREASE YOUR LENGTH WITH 200%" scams from somelameass@hotmail.com, it works well against (half-)serious companies stuffing your email. Threatening them with fines and imprisonment for up to six months (of course there's a world of difference between the average punishment and the maximum sentence) gets most people thinking...
Kjella
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I'd sure like to know exactly who it is that is fighting Vermont's new privacy rules. I just want to identify the enemy.
If I read it correctly, the businesses affected are those regulated by Vermont's Banking, Insurance, Securities and Health Care Administration, and there are five "industry trade groups" fighting it.
The American Council of Life Insurers was identified as one of the groups. Unfortunately, the page on their site that lists the member companies isn't working (may be slashdotted).
The article also quotes a spokesman from Citigroup, Inc., which consists of Citibank, Travelers, Smith Barney, Primerica, Citigroup Private Bank, Diners Club International, Banamex, Citi Insurance, Citi Financial, Citi Capital, Citigroup Corporate & Investment Bank, Citiroup Asset Management and Citi Mortgage.
Anybody know who the rest are?
TyZone
A friend of mine works for the USPS, and she turned me on to it. It helps pay her salary, plus those business reply envelopes are expensive. She said the key was to get enough crap in the envelope that it weighed over an ounce.
As a bonus, I made little flyers on bright paper: "This complete waste of your time and money was brought to you by [name, address] who would like to be removed from your mailing lists." I'd wrap a flyer around an ounce or so of ripped up paper and stuff that in the envelope.
I viewed it as a lark, just a fun thing to do when I got home every day. But you know, after 6 months of it, my junk mail dropped dramatically. From 3 or 5 pieces a day to just 1 or 2 a week. In short, I'd strongly recommend this to anyone plagued by direct mail.
This isn't as much "normalization" as it is "don't take so many drugs when you're designing tables."
Just like Microsoft had the best of Joe and Jane Doe inmind when it used monopolistic bullying to get their OS installed to every computer. Or how the oil companies (with president Bush as a spokes person)have the best of the consumers in mind when they dumped the Kioto agreement.
How nice..
"There is a terrorist behind every bush"
Europe has fairly strong privacy laws.
Canada has passed a privacy law (applies to Federal Agencies now, will apply to everyone by (I think) end of 2002).
I am more familiar with the gist of Canada's law, which goes:
Must tell you what they are going to do with the information when they ask for it;
Must get explicit permission from you to do anything other than what they said the first time;
Automatically applies to any information given to a 3rd party or info which crosses a provincial or federal boundary.
A single consumer complaint automatically triggers an investigation;
It is backed by some pretty stiff penalties; huge fines and provisions to jail company directors.
It is a crime to even ASK for a Social Insurance Number (ie Social Security #) unless authorized by legislation (Bank, Gov't Agency, Employer). You can refuse-I know one person who has never given the number out, even on Credit Card Applications, and yes, he gets his cards.
I don't know about Maine, but recently the EU granted Canada's law to be sufficently protective of consumer's rights that Canada & Canadian Firms are "trusted" entities with regard to European Privacy Laws.
I'm seriously considering copyrighting my identity. And while I'm at it I think I'll encrypt it as well.
Thus, if anybody uses it without my explicit permission in any context I get to sue them using copyright laws.
And if they try to hack my identity I can use the DCMA on them..
Take that...
Caution: Contents under pressure
1: Our Senator Jeffords got fed up with how far the Republican Right was going and became and Independent.
2: Only Socialist Congressman in the US.
3: First state to pass a civil unions bill.
4: No billboards!
5: Last state in the country to get a Walmart (we've got two or three now).
6: Both open-carry and permitless concealed-carry of firearms permitted (I hate guns, but I hate gun laws more).
7: Last state to adopt a flag-burning resolution (who the fuck needs it).
8: Senator Leahy.
9: Citizen legislature
10: Smallest state capitol in the US (though, IIRC, more lawyers per capita than any other capitol).
11: Road salt
Okay, downsides...
1: Clouds.
2: Cold.
3: Clueless SUV drivers (oh, you got those too?)
4: Did I mention clouds?
Now, if we could just make it illegal for telemarketers to auto-dial every number (including unlisted), make it illegal for voter registration lists to be bought, and force marketers to reveal, upon our request, where they got our name, I'd be far happier. Oh, and not allow the phone co to CHARGE us for an unlisted number.
Go Vermont!
DoC
You can at least stop phone solicitors from calling you in Oregon now.
.com, they are being contracted by the Oregon state government to do this.
You go to http://www.ornocall.com and pay ~$6.50 to get on a list that gets published quaterly. If a solicitor calls you, they get a hefty fine.
Note, that the calls will stop, depending on when you register. I registered in December and made it onto the January 2002 list.
Where I literally used to get 3-4 phone solicitor calls a night, I now get absolutely no calls whatsoever (In fact, I'm begging for someone to call, so I can fry their ass).
It works well, and while it's crap that I have to pay to get phone solicitors to stop, it's a step in the right direction. Besides a $6.50 fee, with an annual renewal fee of $3.00 isn't so bad.
Also note, that while that web address is a