Slashdot Mirror
Washington Dancers Sue To Prevent Identity Disclosure
An anonymous reader writes with this BBC story about a Washington open-records law that is having some controversial consequences for some unlikely people. "Government open-records requests can be boring. Government open-records requests made by a man who wants to obtain information about 70 licensed strippers in his town so he can 'pray for them', on the other hand... The godly citizen in question is David Allen Van Vleet of Tacoma, Washington. In September he filed court papers to obtain personal information on 70 government-licensed nude dancers at a nightclub in his area — including their full names, addresses, photos and dates of birth. (Yes, Washington requires nude dancers to pay a $75 a year license fee.) The county auditor granted his request under the state's open-records law - although she also notified area dancers and club managers of her action. On 21 October two licensees sued to block the release of the information. Two days later a county judge issued a temporary order blocking the release, with a final decision scheduled for 15 December."
Under the freedom of information act this would be refused likely on the grounds of data protection or No discernible public interest. Does the US law not have an equivalent?
How much of David Allen Van Vleet's personal information is now public record because he filed these court papers?
Does the state's database only include actual strippers? In Ohio, police stole a woman's drivers license information and assigned it to an undercover officer, who then got hired on as a stripper as part of a sting operation. It sure would suck if, after being victimized by the police in that manner, a woman was then subjected to who knows what sort of harassment from a random citizen who just wanted to "pray for" her.
Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
I cannot see how the argument for 'prayer' is legit on logistical or supernatural grounds. There is no clear public benefit here to release this information to this person for the purposes of his own (I guess) spiritual needs. I'd even be hard pressed to make the case if he wanted to do direct health outreach. The licensees can be reached via the places of employ.
Furthermore, one can readily presume that if you are prying for someone to an allegedly omniscient being, he/she/it would be able to work out the details.
If your deity has all the info already?
If your deity doesn't want to divulge the information, you shouldn't be asking the government for it, should you?
You can always pray for Jane Doe 1, Jane Doe 2 etc. Your deity will know for whom the prayers are meant and will change his plan, just for you.
Bert
Same idiocy happened here in the Netherlands when a journalist, someone with extreme leftist connections and a known ETA (terrorist organization) sympathizer, requested the names and addresses of firearms license holders under open government laws. In the end, the guy did not get the requested info i.e. name and address, photo, and serial numbers of the weapons, but he did get a list of date of birth and city of residence of each license holder as well as the manual for Verona, the software that tracks firearm licenses. As a gun owner, the idea of government freely handing this info to people closely tied to ETA terrorists somehow does not give me a warm cozy feeling about sensitive data being in safe governmental hands.
It's very simple: "open government" means that the government should disclose information on the details of their own operation, but never information that can be tied to individuals, except where it concerns information on holders of public office that is relevant to the right of the public to monitor them. Only aggregated data on citizens should be disclosed. And for civil servants or elected officials, relevant data means stuff like expense claims, not stuff like their address, records of previous employment or registered religion.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
IANAL, but I believe you can hire a lawyer to file a suit as an anonymous plaintiff, for a legally justifiable reason of course.
The open records request and fulfillment isn't the issue here. If the government licenses someone, you should be able to request the information of everyone with that license (although I'm not sure home information should be included since it is a professional license). This would be the easiest way to see who is and isn't a licensed professional.
The issue is why in the bloody hell is the government licensing dancers? There is no reason to do that other than they want to collect some extra fees from people. There is no professional service being offered that a license would effect. The purpose of licensing professionals is to ensure that the person meets some basic requirements. Unless they are going to try and require a minimum cup size or dancing ability, there isn't anything to license here.
"Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
There is no such thing as "fornication in one's heart", only "adultery in one's heart".
If he's concerned about a need to "pray for them", he needs at minimum to restrict the information request to the strippers who are married. Interference with marriage being the one actual case where damage could occur.
Probably an Evangelical. He should drop the inquiry and spend the time reading Song of Solomon instead. He'll probably learn... a lot.
Umm, Roe v. Wade was brought by an anonymous plaintiff. "Roe" because there was a simultaneous case brought by a "Doe".
Selling the driver's license information and cat registration information is considered a revenue opportunity for states.
...this guy's not praying for them, he's praying for himself. He's praying that he'll figure out which are the youngest dancers, where they live, so he can stalk/harass them, under the guise of "they need to be saved."
I seriously doubt a stripper believes she needs to be saved. Just ask her paycheck.
There would be no issue here if the state didn't have a BS licensing law.
Seriously: who or what interest does the state imagine it is "protecting" with this license? It isn't there for practical purposes, it's there for the purposes of intimidation and control.
The licensing law is bad because it is the licensing law itself that led to this conflict between public's right to know and an individual's privacy. I do agree that the individual has a right to privacy away from the workplace... but it is the STATE that is violating it with this STUPID law.
The funny thing is that under most circumstances, nudity is not legal in Washington... except, I guess, when you're on stage without a license.
Washington State sells that as well. I used to license my vehicles at a PO Box. Then we had a state law passed* requiring vehicle records be registered to a physical address. So now all the dealers' junk mail** starts appearing at my home.
*People started ducking Seatle's high license tab fees by registering in outlying communities.
**"Our records show you have a year X model Y vehicle for which we have a number of interested buyers." Dealers have ownership databases supposedly to support sending recall notices. But their overarching use seems to be advertising. And if you've got a buddy working at a dealrship, they can run plates for you faster than the cops.
Have gnu, will travel.
If he seriously believed his $DEITY, then he could pray to his $DEITY to reveal him the information directly instead of a FOI request. Surely his $DEITY is all-seeing, all-knowing kind?
Seriously. The guy doesn't want to pray for them, he wants to publicly shame them.
Fuck you and your region that you hide behind you pieces of shit.
that I am not the only one praying for naked women every night.
That said, you'd think an all knowing God already knows who the strippers are.
Some privacy policy Slashdot.
If releasing the records to the public is a privacy or other civil rights violation, then creating them should be the same violation. If we can't make the data public, then find a way to regulate without collecting the data, or forego the regulation entirely.
In the past these repositories of personal information, names addresses and dates of birth,were maintained in the explicit interest of providing an expedited avenue for puritanical groups to harass and intimidate through the power of the state. In the past many owners of gay and lesbian night clubs were targets of assaunt and assassination through public records. Today, many modern puritanical laws infringe upon liberty in the pursuit of extremist religious doctrine as well. for example, abortion records have no HIPAA protection in order to explicitly allow religious groups to target service practitioners, customers, and staff. Lately that targeting has been of a distinctly terrorist nature through the reticle of a high powered rifle, or the blast radius of an improvised explosive. Of course Mister Van Vleet insists he merely wants to 'pray' for the dancers. He insists the prayers will not function through their stage names alone, but only through their real names which is strange as many christians pray for the troops amorphously and not by name. when pressured by a journalist, he insisted he would not harm the dancers but that prayer was merely 1 of many 'protected reasons' he needs the names.
strip clubs, whatever we may think of them, are a beacon of nothing less than american liberty. they dont exist in Pakistan, Iran, or North Korea and to suggest as this religious zealot has that somehow 7 million washingtonians are as fervently interested in the personal information of less than 100 dancers is to succor a distant memory of 1850 when the riverboat was queen and the negro was "scientifically" inferior. The menace of sexual temptation in the 21st century as it applies to 'decency' of any nation ranks rather lowly on this millenials list of concerns, trumped easily by the menace of having to explain to his 7 year old son what to do in a school shooting.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/201...
Good people go to bed earlier.
This is becoming a common question: Why is this on Slashdot?
Can you make a request and get the state drivers license records in Washington?
It seems to me that you actually don't need someone's personal details just to pray for them.
There would be no issue here if the state didn't have a BS licensing law.
Seriously: who or what interest does the state imagine it is "protecting" with this license? It isn't there for practical purposes, it's there for the purposes of intimidation and control.
The licensing law is bad because it is the licensing law itself that led to this conflict between public's right to know and an individual's privacy. I do agree that the individual has a right to privacy away from the workplace... but it is the STATE that is violating it with this STUPID law.
Obvious answers: underage dancers, human trafficking, tax collection.
Washington State is supposed to remove certain sensitive information in records requests--like the home address of a state employee--but generally it has a very permissive open records law. The strippers can probably just argue their identity is basically sensitive information, and then the court will probably say that the identities can't be released for a request to pray for them.
Or a request for the particulars on all people with concealed carry permits.
I wonder if the Photos where taken with the women using their work uniform... That this kind of information can be made public is a bit scary
including their full names, addresses, photos and dates of birth
I want to know more about those photos. Do that clearly document how suitable these young women are to be in this profession? If so, maybe I need a copy so that I can pray for then too. And clearly you need all of this information to pray for them, God would have no idea who to credit the prayers to if you didn't have their full name, address and date of birth.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
Ummm, why does he need the names and addresses to pray for them? Sort of like “what does God need with a starship?” Surely this man's all seeing deity can take care of these wayward soles by just know this man cares about the state of their immortal souls.
Of course maybe this is a more impotent rather than Omnipotent God, in which case I guess this man has to carry God's message in person, to do what God can't.
Letter To Iran
Ideally, a licensing should be to verify that a particular individual has a licence in good standing. The person supplies the already-known information and the government only confirms that it's valid.
It's not the same as other public records where there is a public interest in having all the information.
What's the point of having an open-records law if their openness gets shunted aside the moment the law is applied? Alas, it's yet another illustration of how our politicians don't know what they're doing. Did they ever think through the implications, pro and con, of this legislation?
Probably not. They were too busy dining with lobbyists for this special interest group or that one. They just thought the public would get a buzz off the term "open-records" and voted it in.
Selling the driver's license information and cat registration information is considered a revenue opportunity for states.
Fortunately, dog license registrations are still kept private. Too bad for all those people with registered cats.
If your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd murder you in your sleep
If they were easier to get I'd happily cough up the $75 to become an officially licensed exotic dancer, but the county referenced when I first saw this story a few days ago looked like it'd be a pain unless you were actually an employee of one of the businesses.
Of course, if I did this my wife might actually demand that I dance for her and that could just be ugly all around. I am not a man built for a stripper pole.
fencepost
just a little off
I'm interested in the real identity of Jaquie from the Industrial Strip Gentleman's Club in Hammond, IN. Sweetie, if you see this, call me. Daddy's been bad again.
Don't look at me like that. She's working her way through law school, you know.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Does anybody at all see anything wrong with that concept? You can be honest, this is not a poll.
I gotta wonder how long we will remain the dominant species on the planet.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
While this is the funniest thing I've seen posted in a long time, I also think it's wrong.
But this is the great thing about the constitution and the bodies of laws we create.
Where does that line start or end.
I wonder what will become of this.
if you see me, smile and say hello.
Nudes for Nerds! Stuff That Matters!
If you disagree with me on social issues, then it's pretty clear that you are a narrow-minded bigot.
Suppose it was another state licensed field, like barbers. Many state require barbers to have a license. Do you think that story would get posted in the first place, or get so many comments? I wonder.
Why is Snark Required?
Please send me the full names, addresses, photos and dates of birth of all strippers in my state.
P.S.
If you'd like to conserve paper you can just send the photos.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
The bigger problem is that the government feels it has a right to know where you live and requires you to reveal your primary place of business even if that business is operated from your home or truck. This is wrong. While there may be a public interest in the government having this information an illegitimate business can operate without providing this information and thus there is no justification for the requirement as an investigation in the event of corruption or criminality can result in it being obtained anyway by other means.
My personal privacy has been invaded as the results of these laws. Non-governmental agencies have obtained the physical address where I reside and work despite my effort to keep it private via maintaining a non-PO box mailing address. However because the government requires the primary physical address where you operate and other entities can obtain that information my home address ends up in a public database – which is NOT the actual address of the business (all business corespondents go to our BUSINESS mailing address). Unfortunately because I work at home and do not rent office space outside the home I have no choice, because a mailing address is not acceptable to the government. Nor to a number of other entities such as banks and credit agencies. That also is the result of BS laws that the government instituted that require the banks to physically verify customers addresses by driving by those addresses.
Humorously there are numerous way to get around it, but they aren't legal, or are at least costly. IE I could rent an address, but always work from home. However, why should I have to pay $200 month for office space I'm not using? And if you rent a mailbox or PO box you have to provide identify information anyway. The whole thing is unethical.
I had to threaten one credit agency with a lawsuit in order to get them to change the records they had on file of the business. They are an abusive privately held company at that which blackmails businesses into providing them information they do not deserve and what amounts to paying them for a better credit rating. If you have never heard of them the business is D&B.
No, it's not.
OK, thanks.
I guess they will all go to hell and stuff.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
How do you prove standing unless you disclose the identity of the client?
I can't sue to assert your rights.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
"so he can 'pray for them', on the other hand"
So, um, what is he doing with the first hand?
...omphaloskepsis often...
Its called filing under seal.
At the least, can't one dancer file suit, while the rest stay anonymous?
XDInd
This would be a violation of procedural law, and essentially due process.
You don't get to file a case anonymously just because you would be embarrassed by having your identity known, or you are concerned about public hostility or employment termination.
It is indeed allowed by some judges in exigent circumstances, such as if there is a severe threat of violent retaliation or other severe injury unrelated to the outcome of the case.
In other words.... unless something rather special is going on, the plaintiffs ID will be known; you can't get your ID hidden in a case "just because", in spite of the fact, that sometimes, indeed, plaintiffs can be anonymous under special circumstances.
Shouldn't he be off helping the poor instead of victimizing women that have enough trouble without a vigalantee with a hard-on turning up outside their front door?
Don't bother with the popcorn, it will be someone from a government department showing their face to stop some prick going all Taliban on those women.
There's one fundamental difference though: political activity. The lists of people opposed to gay marriage were lists of people who were either directly involved in political activity or who contributed large amounts to it. Those records are and should be in general public. If you step into politics in a public way (beyond merely voting or contributing reasonable amounts as a private individual), you step out of the role of a private citizen. You're publicly advocating for political (and by extension legal) policies and goals that affect the public whether they agree with you or not, you can't expect to do that and still hide from that public behind a cloak of anonymity. If you want that anonymity, stick to just believing in a position and voting in accordance with that. If you want to get into politics and political activity in a serious way, don't expect to remain completely a private citizen.
These strippers, on the other hand, are not engaging in any political activity. They're purely private citizens whose only interaction with the government here is in getting the license that government requires. That shouldn't expose them as public figures. The information is only needed by those involved with enforcement of the business regulations, and even they only need to know whether or not the information's on file. If it's on file the license is valid and the enforcement people don't need to know the details, and if it's not on file there obviously isn't anything in the government records to disclose.
Obscenity laws are 100% unconstitutional and the first amendment lists no such exceptions to freedom of speech; that nonsense was created when judges modified the constitution with invisible ink rather than interpreting it as they're supposed to. Care to try again?
Can I get the address etc of this guy under the same laws? Surely, records of who asked for information are kept... Then I can 'pray' for him.
There is no public benefit at all to making strippers beg a government bureaucrat for permission to take their clothes off for money.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Too bad your mechanical manhood doesn't do anything about actual threats. Blaming strippers however, lets you transfer everything into women, which you probably have additional problems with, hence the need for your attempts at augmenting your manhood.
It is indeed allowed by some judges in exigent circumstances, such as if there is a severe threat of violent retaliation or other severe injury unrelated to the outcome of the case.
Like some religious nutter demanding the real names of all the strippers? Anyone who thinks he and his ilk just want to pray for them might be interested in this bridge I'd like to sell off.
This guy wants personal info of strippers so he can "pray" for them? Right.
Please send me the personal info for Jessica Alba asap. I'd like to pray for her too. Sigh.
Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
Any chance this guy was recently defrocked?
Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
What deity do he pray to that needs him to know the names? Most people who pray choose to pray to an all-knowing, all-seeing, everywhere all the time, all-powerful deity. Surely if he prays for them in general an omniscient, omnipresent, all-powerful deity could figure it out.
This sounds like a ploy for a dirty stalker.
So a girl can dance nude in public but insists that she has a right to keep that public performance history a secret. She must be a blond to think like that. There is not one thing wrong with being a sex worker. She should be proud of what she did. And yes if she danced she was hooking.
I always thought Roe was used because it had something to do with eggs.
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
I don't like obscenity laws anymore than you do but your argument is flawed. When you say "rather than interpreting it as they're supposed to" what one is usually trying to imply is that it's not being interpreted the way they want it to be. If you aren't trying to imply anything, which I'm sure you'll claim, then "interpreting it as they're supposed to" would require a literal interpretation and that makes your argument fail as well. The only literal interpretation is actual speech. So dancing, expression, painting a billboard, donating your money, etc are not physical speech. A literal interpretation says you have the freedom to physically say whatever you want along with gathering for grievances and printing it in newspaper. Nothing else. I, for one, am glad that judges can from time to time, realize that sticking to a literal interpretation is stupid and entirely too anal retentive.
If this kind of thing keeps happening I want the identity of the submitter included aliong with the title in my emails.. please.. so I can avoid wastiong my time.. TY.
I bet there are quite a few people arguing that this is a Bad Thing here but were all in favor of the New York fiasco of publishing maps to the homes of people with firearms permits, because it was after all, you know, "public record".
I don't like obscenity laws anymore than you do but your argument is flawed. When you say "rather than interpreting it as they're supposed to" what one is usually trying to imply is that it's not being interpreted the way they want it to be. If you aren't trying to imply anything, which I'm sure you'll claim, then "interpreting it as they're supposed to" would require a literal interpretation and that makes your argument fail as well.
You are wrong on both counts. I think you should take into account *both* the spirit and the wording, but that, this being "the land of the free and the home of the brave," judges should err on the side of freedom, rather than on the side of government thugs. So, yes, "speech" obviously meant more than just literal speech, but at the same time, you can't just add random exceptions to freedom of speech because you feel like it.
It is absolutely 100% nonsensical to interpret the spirit of the constitution as saying that it is okay for the government to arbitrarily ban certain speech because people are offended by it. Absolute nonsense.
Leaving aside the issue of whether (voluntary) prostitution ought to be the government's concern at all, I still don't see why this requires public records. Want to know the person's age? Ask to see their government-issued photo ID. Driver's licenses, non-driver ID, passports, and so forth all already exist for (among others) that exact purpose. Yes, they can be forged, but what about a driver's license is more forgeable than a nude dancing license? As for criminal background checks, those are a standard part of many hiring processes.
There's no need to license and track this particular form of occupation specifically. None at all.
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
Well not a lawyer but this doesn't pass mustard for things that must be handed over for public knowledge. They are not government officials, they don't make laws don't get a government check same as asking for all data from drivers license oh wait they sell that data right?? And he can stand outside of the business and pray for them there, that is public property. making them get licenses is purely a money making scam by the local government.
Jack of all trades,master of none
Its called filing under seal.
Filing under seal allows you to separate certain case documents which contain confidential information and redact documents which contain personal private information such as social security number, DOB, or the full name of a minor.
Filing under seal doesn't allow you to hide the existence of the case or the names of parties to the case, it is only available for keeping sensitive and confidential information out of the record.
Be very careful about voting to release someone else's information. Government lists are -not- perfect, and no matter how strange the list, -your- name and info might be on it!!
identity (name) is one thing; photos, dob, full disclosure of address for stalking purposes (good intended stalking is still stalking) is another