Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Senate Scrutinizes Privacy Issues of ISP User Tracking

Posted by kdawson on from the you-want-to-watch-me-you-have-to-pay dept.

Hugh Pickens writes "As companies collect, use, and disseminate data regarding online users, there is concern that tracking individuals' Internet activity and gathering information from online users violates their expectations of privacy. The Senate Commerce Committee will hold a hearing Wednesday to look at the policy issues, and the hottest topic will be proposed systems by which ISPs can watch users and sell information about their surfing habits to advertising companies. The Center for Democracy and Technology has issued a report suggesting that these systems may violate federal law (PDF). 'Advertising per se is not the evil here,' says Leslie Harris from CDT. 'It's the collection of individuals' information, usually without their knowledge, always without their consent, creation of profiles and the complete inability of people to make choices about that.' On the other side NebuAd, the most active ad-targeting company, says its profiles are interest-based, and not personally identifiable. 'We have designed our entire company to make sure that we stay on the opt-out side of those laws and policies,' says NebuAd CEO Robert Dykes. Charter Communications announced last month that it would suspend a trial of NebuAd due to customer concerns about privacy."

5 of 109 comments (clear)

  1. Boiling a frog by Mike+Rice · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How ironic that Congress is, in all likelihood, about to pass a telecoms immunity bill which allows them to spy on us... but are giving lip service to the issue of telecoms spying on us.

    CongressCritters and Snoozators will soon be making a lot of noise about how they are protecting the public from being spied upon, while at the same time making it legal for us to be spied on.

    Nothings changed, just another election year.

    1. Re:Boiling a frog by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What free market? I hope you don't mean the mockery thereof that the current market of corporate cartels is.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  2. Re:Since When Do They Care About Our Privacy? by Tackhead · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They're going to grant the telecoms immunity and the Bush Administration a free pass on breaking federal wiretap laws and violating the 4th Amendment, but *this* concerns them? Spare me.

    1970s: Don't steal. The government hates competition.
    2010s: Don't spy on your users. The government still hates competition.

  3. Re:Scrutiny should extend further. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You can always sue a company.

    Not so. After tomorrow, for example, Americans will no longer be able to sue AT&T for violating the law by letting the Bush Administration tap their phones without any judicial oversight.

    The current president has taken the 60-year old notion of "state secrets" to an extent that absolutely shreds the Bill of Rights, but there was always the possibility that the truth would come out and the lawbreakers would have to pay. After tomorrow, not any more.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  4. Re:Scrutiny should extend further. by corsec67 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Doesn't "state secrets" as currently used in court violate the first amendment?

    Not the speech part, the ... to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. part.

    --
    If I have nothing to hide, don't search me