Slashdot Mirror
On Several Fronts, US Gov't Prepares To Regulate Online Privacy
storagedude writes "There are at least five US government efforts underway to regulate data and online privacy, according to a new US government internet policy official, who sees some kind of privacy regulation as likely. Ari Schwartz, who left the Center for Democracy and Technology two months ago to become senior internet policy advisor at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, says issues like Facebook's never-ending privacy concerns are making some kind of a national law or regulation more and more likely. He thinks segregating identity from data isn't enough; the data must then be aggregated after identity is stripped out. He also called for objective measures of privacy compliance."
And one by one all the bills will die on the floor as the campaign money comes rolling in.
There is a war going on for your mind.
That sounds a little bit sarcastic.
It may not be a step towards government dictatorship, but it is a step towards an environment where an oppressive government could germinate rather quickly. Or did you mean government dictatorship in the context of regulations and Big Government?
My first thought was that this is like having the fox guard the hen house. Considering how far the government has gone in the last 20 years to eliminate our rights to privacy, anonymity, and free communications in general I find it rather curious they are stepping up to protect us from Mr. Zuckerburg and evil Google.
They are the least of my worries. After all, I am not forced to deal with them.
While the government starts to create regulations that affect companies like Facebook and Google, I wonder why we so quickly forget its intentions to secure access to all encrypted voice communications? That development was quite recent, but let's forget that and talk about how people can see what I am doing with my chickens in Farmville. That is far more important right?
The US government is sufficiently large that there isn't a single entity which can be called "the government". One part may well be genuinely interested in protecting privacy, while another part is doing its best to have the Fourth Amendment repealed. Schizophrenic? Oh yes. It's also part of why trying to make plans on what the regulatory environment will be like in four years a complete crapshoot.
There's also the matter than if the government acquires the ability to specifically regulate privacy on Internet sites (above and beyond the more basic "your Terms of Service say X, you did Y, you are in material breach of contract" which applies to all businesses), this forms precedent that the government has the power to regulate other things... content, access, reporting. Only the DHS and other jackboots would consider this a good thing.
No new law or government entity is needed to enforce compliance with privacy statements. Facebook can be held liable for violating its Terms of Service, and fraud on the basis of saying "we don't do this" when they in fact do (and then profiting from it). We don't need a Department of Enforcing Internet Stuff; we just need a judge, a jury, a plaintiff, and a court date.
Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
The EU and the Brits figured this out long ago. The British data protection act is a model of privacy protection that we should have emulated. But that was in the day that the world wide wibbley web was still very immature and back when moneyed interests weren't as powerful. Now there's so much inertia for data mining the web that this will never see the light of day outside any Senate or House committee.
--
BMO
The US government is sufficiently large that there isn't a single entity which can be called "the government". One part may well be genuinely interested in protecting privacy, while another part is doing its best to have the Fourth Amendment repealed. Schizophrenic? Oh yes.
Hey! That's not what schizophrenic means! You should instead have said "Does the US government appear to have dissociative identity disorder? Oh yes."