Slashdot Mirror
Obama Calls For New Privacy Bill of Rights
CWmike writes "The Obama Administration is backing a new data privacy bill of rights aimed at protecting consumers against indiscriminate online tracking and data collection by advertisers. In recent times, high-profile examples of a need for improving privacy laws include Facebook's personal data collection practices and Google's problems over its Street View Wi-Fi snooping issue. In testimony prepared for the Senate Committee on Commerce Science and Transportation, the Commerce Department's assistant secretary, Lawrence Strickling, said that the White House wants Congress to enact legislation offering 'baseline consumer data privacy protections.' Strickling said the administration's call for new online privacy protections stems from recommendations made by the Commerce Department in a paper released in December. The administration's support for privacy protections is very significant, said Joel Reidenberg, a professor at Fordham Law School who specializes in privacy issues. 'This is the first time since 1974 that the U.S. government has supported mandatory general privacy rules,' Reidenberg said."
This or White House Wants New Copyright Law Crackdown?
How about not having to be seen naked in order to be able to fly? Or that there should be a court order before my electronic communications can be intercepted by law enforcement / intelligence agencies?
Bush, Obama, same thing...
I wonder how far this will go - would it stop Facebook from having some sort of User License Agreement whereby users can only get on Facebook if they allow all their info to be sold on?
Can we PLEASE stop talking about Google as if they did something wrong? I don't exactly blame my neighbors for hearing me when I stand on the top of my house screaming my personal information in all directions.
Woop. If Obama spent less time sucking up to activists instead of balancing the budget, fixing the economy, he might have a chance in hell of getting a second term.
What he really means is that he is tired of the competition and wants monopoly on the snooping business.
Nobody else should have to much knowledge except Big Brother himself.
Prosp long and liver.
So first they back ideas to introduce total internet data retention, surveillance, tracking and killswitch control in order to fight pirates. Then they back ideas about better privacy? What sort of morons make decisions in the white house?
Experiments and other stuff
Quite frankly, if you don't want the information shared- you shouldn't put it out there to begin with. Facebook should be able to sell of any data it wishes provided users know they are giving up that information freely. If they don't read the TOS the fault should be on them.
Right now our Social Security Numbers act as an identifier and a unchangeable password. I wish that somebody would address this data issue.
Mr. Zukerberg, please pick up the white courtesy phone. Your campaign contributions are needed urgently. Oh, thank-you Mr. Zuckerberg. We'll see to it that this dies in committee.
For a moment there I thought someone had gotten to him and we were going to have the Fourth Amendment back again.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
Wait a minute .. isn't this the same guy who, when he was a Senator, voted for the bill to give AT&T retroactive immunity to their illegal wiretaps?
I guess it just goes to show, in 2008 Obama was just another politician, as corrupt and ineffective as anyone else, but now in 2011 he's become an idealist, finally offering the hope and change that just three years ago, nobody could credibly believe in.
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
I'm no lawyer or politician, but could this perhaps be legislation made in response to the recent Wikileaks fiasco?
"So don't get programmed by anybody but yourself" --Bill S. Preston, Esquire
They're not mad because Google collected a bunch of wi-fi data. They're mad because Google didn't share it with them. They want to pass new regulation, new "oversight," ie... the next time this happens the government will get their grubby little hands all over the data.
Ditto with facebook.
"We need to see your data so, uh... we know what you're collecting. We're protecting privacy! Yeah, that's it. Privacy."
wow they are going to write a law showing you just how much privacy you don't have... anymore
thanks obama! Go play some more golf we got this anyway
it says right in the title he wants a new bill of rights. one can only assume this means the old one will be discarded (as if parts of it haven't been already)
http://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
The number one violator of privacy is the federal government. On the internet, on the phone, with out passports, with TSA, even on our drivers licenses they're just non stop. How about not having to tell the IRS my bank account, my income, or every transaction over 10000, since when was anything like that any of their freaking business.
Anybody else bothered by the fact that a Constitutional Scholar who has ascended to President seems to have a fairly layman's concept of what the Bill of Rights does? I mean, the Bill of Rights applies to the GOVERNMENT, enumerated specific rights that the GOVERNMENT cannot infringe upon. However, TFA seems to insinuate that Obama is expecting this new "Bill of Rights" to be applicable to corporations, even other individuals.
Isn't the concept of what rights are and what the Government can/can't do a distinction that a Constitutional Scholar would not be so haphazard in conflating? It seems to me that a programmer wouldn't go around talking about "refactoring" in regards to bringing manufacturing back to town.
Scott
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
It's not companies we need protection from. If Target tracks my buying habits the worst that can happen to me is they screw it up and offer me coupons for feminine hygiene products (I'm male, though when my daughters were still living with me, that might have come in handy).
I'm not afraid of Target violating my privacy Mr. President. I'm afraid of YOU and your ilk listening in on my phone calls, reading my emails, tracking my web surfing, peering into my bank account and groping me and irradiating me every time I want to visit my sister or brother.
So do us all a favor and can the consumer protection, read the 1st and 4th amendments again and see what you can do about giving me back the REAL rights I've lost instead falsely bolstering my imaginary right to "Privacy".
By god, Zuckerberg ain't gonna like this. Your privacy is his billions!
So if the federal government is now in favor of us having the right to control our privacy, I guess this means they'll stop threatening to throw us into jail when we don't tell them our business, huh? ;-)
They got what they paid for?
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
spies on more people and collects more personal information than any other organization in the world.
... right, like i am supposed to believe that...
yeah
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
He's joking right? The day after expanding copyright "reform" and weeks after renewing the patriot act...fuck you obama change my ass
OK, so today the White House announced its support for two new laws. One protects citizens from predatory trade practices, the other extends the fiat monopoly powers of a corporate lobbying group. Seems like a fine opportunity for a free market and representative democracy shootout.
1. Which one will get gutted before passage?
2. Which one will be broadened before passage?
3. Which one will pass first?
4. Which one will be decried by the opposition party as unconscionable government interference in the free market?
5. Which one will be lauded as necessary government protection of the free market?
Ready... Race!
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
like when they named the act that takes away your right to not be spied on and illegally searched the patriot act. I would be interested in what obama is really up to cause he has abandoned helping regular people.
If only he was backing a bill aimed at protecting [citizens] against tracking and data collection by their [government].
But I doubt that will ever happen.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
Can we get some protection from warrantlesss wiretaps? Holding people without charge? Torture?
Unreasonable search and seizure? Naked body scans and invasive patdowns?
I want privacy rights against the Government spying on me.
And yes, he's a Token President.
What do I mean? he's like every other piece of shit token polititian that says whatever works to get him in office and then doesn't go thru with his promises. Token.
For the record, I made the mistake of believing his speeches. Won't happen again.
Be seeing you...
"Don't spy, the government hates competition".
As long as the US government routinely and massively records email, web traffic and phone conversations, they have no business telling others to not do the same or much smaller things.
Is this Privacy Bill going to protect us from DHS border searches? Since this administration has been so pro-ACTA, I think they should certainly review their opinions on privacy.
All data is speech. All speech is Free.
Never give an inch. How can anything filmed from the street violate anyone's privacy? This crap is absurd.
When I read the summary I thought "Finally!" Then I remembered all the weasel-worded laws enacted at the federal level to nullify any true protections that might be passed at the state level.
how about you protect the citizens from our own government? THAT's what I worry more about.
I company can't keep fucking with you until you die. the government can.
I can manage companies. I cannot manage an out-of-control info-hungry COUNTRY.
get rid of TSA and put air travel back where it was 10+ yrs ago and then maybe we'll believe you are 'concerned' about our privacy.
assholes.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
There you go, this is what it's all about, always has been, and always will be.
The magical number is: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Obama is a lawyer, so he understands something.
His highest priority as a legislator and now as the commander in chief is to protect the right to abortion. Roe v. Wade doesn't establish an absolute right to abortion, it determined that a woman's right to privacy allows her to get an abortion. If the right to privacy disappears, so does Obama's sacrament.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
But what about a constitutional amendment to protect our data rights as citizens? I mean, hurray that they're doing something, but I would figure at this day and age that privacy through protection of data would be big enough to warrant something like that..... Not like any politician would ever consider it, though.
I saw that headline and I felt a ray of hope.
And then I read it and realized he's talking about tracking me on the internet (trendy!) and not about actually preventing my personal, kind of a bigger deal, Rights, from being trampled on - the TSA and Guantanamo and security theater and 9/11 as an excuse to let law enforcement do whatever it feels like in the name of security and wiretapping and the lack of judicial review.
But we got a Facebook Bill of Rights instead.
Amazing.
--Triv
After all, they seem to be pulling out all the stops to ensure that our privacy is a thing of the past. Maybe they just don't want the advertisers on their turf.
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
And the new privacy bill of rights answers with a very weak whisper before finally dying.
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
Is this in any way to the "please-don't-track-me" header or optout-cookie proposals being volleyed around by gov/browser folks and the IAB, respectively? Have they worked out how they actually plan to enforce this business and keep everybody honest?
So.. do you remember when you were a kid, on Halloween, somebody would put out a big bucket of candy and a "please take only one" sign? Do you remember how well that worked? Well, now those kids are all grown up and working at internet advertising companies :-) And lemme tell ya, the chocolate bars there are a lot bigger, tastier, and... greener.
Caveat Emptor is not a business model.
One protects citizens from predatory trade practices, the other extends the fiat monopoly powers of His highest priority as a legislator and now as the commander in chief is to protect the right . http://www.keyringscenter.com/accessories/key-rings/christian-dior-414.html
by the same guy who gave AT&T and the NSA a free pass for breaking wiretapping laws. I have to assume in the fine print, the 'privacy' they envision exempts the whole cloths of corporations and the security organs of the State.
The new Privacy Bill of Rights will apply everywhere except at airports, and any other location deemed inconvenient.
Proverbs 21:19
If this is true, and not just another political gambit, it might possibly be interesting. My Representative, Senators, and Presidents, ob both political parties, have been responding to my correspondence abbot privacy issues by telling me they’re taking care of this for about fifty years now and they mostly lied about that, not to mention everything else. My law dean and professor was fond of Will Rogers’ comment that “Whenever Congress makes a joke, it’s a law, and whenever they pass a law, it’s a joke.” Congress has passed assorted laws that purport to protect privacy and several of them actually say you don’t have much if any and others appear to be subsidies for paper companies. It was on a computer-related site that I first learned that the legal people for the companies developing computerized medical records systems with government support and compulsion don’t think they are covered by the HIPAA medical privacy law, for example. Please somebody post Bill Numbers, links to the full text of the Commerce Department report upon which this is supposed to be based, House and Senate Bills, legislative hearings, etc. As of now I can’t find the bill on the usual thomas.loc.gov site, nor have I ever found the original report. And somebody kindly post the names, positions, and Email etc. of any actual computer experts consulted and actually listened to by the politicians in drafting any such legislation, and their recommendations. I read several recommendations in computer publications on line that seem to make sense but never see them embodied in any of the various computer-related laws passed. There really is nothing in the Constitution that requires Congress not to lay down some basic principles that would cover emerging technology. Not everything that may add to the bottom line of anything that calls itself a business enterprise is either consistent with free enterprise or good public policy. I use a lot of ad-supported content. Most people couldn’t afford a lot of what we get via broadcast and cable TV, the Internet, etc. otherwise. A retired lawyer still active in issues and moving toward going back into active practice, I research a lot of arcane issues ranging from medicine to child abuse to construction, and, apparently as a result, I get some very interesting targeted ads. The New York Times has, for years, been, and still is, constantly feeding me ads for residential treatment for the serious problems of the daughter I don’t have. If I go to certain reputable medical sites and check out any story about anything remotely sexual, I get Emails from someone else, with lots of English and spelling errors, telling me, in foul language my wife would never use, that she says I’m no good in bed and offering me fake Viagra substitutes. Setting up a filter that starts with George Carlin’s famous “seven words” cut my spam in half. What bugs me is that some of these somehow use the correct and less common spelling of her name. Checking out some sites for the side of a campaign or issue I oppose has got me Emails thinking me for going on record supporting something I oppose. Maybe some sharp computer expert can explain why I get Email that appears to be addressed only to other people.
mmmm...let me see if I understand this correctly. The Obama regime wants to protect the privacy rights of internet users while compelling teachers to monitor student facebook use. ahhh, errrr, I'm havin' a hard here. Can someone "splain" this to me?
I'd rather see protections for whistleblowers and my freedom to record the authorities than privacy law. If we are legally provided with a right to privacy, you can be sure that corporations and government will have even greater rights to the same. We can handle privacy with common sense and good technology, whilst transparency ne be guaranteed by law.