CORPORATE POWER AND INCENTIVES DO NOT OPERATE TO PROTECT PRIVACY
WHATS GOOD FOR INTERNET COMPANIES IS NOT NECESSARILY GOOD FOR INTERNET USERS
JUBE SHIVER Jr., TIMES STAFF WRITER, Los Angeles Times, March 12, 2000, SECTION: Part A; Page 1; TITLE: INTERNET FIRMS GAIN FOOTHOLD IN WASHINGTON// acs-VT2001
"What's good for dot-com companies is not necessarily in the interest of Internet users themselves, whether we're talking about the failure to prevent cyber attacks, e-mail spam or just general incompetence where the privacy rights of users are concerned," said Edward Segal, president of the Washington-based consumer watchdog group Internetlobby.org.
RELIANCE ON INTERNET SELF-REGULATION GIVES CORPORATIONS TOO MUCH POWER
STEVE LOHR, The New York Times, October 11, 1999, SECTION: Section C; Page 1; TITLE: Seizing the Initiative on Privacy; On-Line Industry Presses Its Case for Self-Regulation // acs-EE2001
Tim Berners-Lee, the British physicist who created the basic software for the Web, is the director of the World Wide Web Consortium at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. His consortium is working on privacy-enhancing technology, software that holds a person's privacy preferences and can communicate and bargain on an individual's behalf over the Internet.
Still, Mr. Berners-Lee said: "On privacy, I don't think that self-regulation is enough. In America, I believe that the lack of regulation means that the corporate marketers have too much power."
US COMPANIES CANNOT BE TRUSTED TO SAFEGUARD PRIVATE INFORMATION
KARLIN LILLINGTON, The Irish Times, March 24, 2000 SECTION: CITY EDITION; BUSINESS THIS WEEK 1; NET RESULTS; Pg. 60 TITLE: EU, US privacy agreement a cause for alarm Decision to postpone considering Net issues is worrying since cyberspace is where the greatest abuses can be perpetrated // acs-VT2001
US companies have consistently, and sometimes dramatically, demonstrated that they are poor guardians of private information. They insist they will self-regulate and then do little except make cosmetic gestures on their websites (and few enough even do that).
THE INTERNET CANNOT POLICE ITSELF ON PRIVACY
Business Week, February 28, 2000; Pg. 174 TITLE: TIME TO MOVE ON INTERNET PRIVACY // acs-EE2001
The hope that the Internet could police itself on privacy is quickly fading, as new invasive technology generates an ominous flood of intrusions. The California HealthCare Foundation recently reported that 16 out of 19 health-care Web sites violated their own privacy policies and allowed confidential medical data to be passed on to advertisers. Then DoubleClick Inc., the biggest Internet ad placement company, unleashed a storm of controversy by profiling thousands of Web surfers by name -- without their explicit consent. The Federal Trade Commission is launching a probe into its data collection practices.
SELF-POLICING JUST MAKES INFO GATHERING MORE PROFITABLE TO THOSE WHO DO NOT SELF-POLICE
Jeff Angus, InformationWeek, September 6, 1999, Pg. 72, TITLE: Your Choice: Free Market Or Privacy // acs-VT2001
Self-policing is a fantastic way to make competitive-intelligence gathering more profitable for people who don't comply with self-policing suggestions. So, which is more important, the right of the individual to privacy or of a company to pursue income?
INCENTIVE TO SELL DATA IS HIGH, AND THE SAFEGUARDS ARE WEAK
Beth Karlin, Insurance Networking, March 1999: Pg. 24 TITLE: The Struggle Over Privacy: Whose Life Is It Anyway? // acs-VT2001