A recent article by the McClatchy Washington Bureau reported that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) will not intervene in the battle between data-miners and Internet marketers–ultimately allowing them to figure out for themselves how to protect the Internet privacy of its users. So much for the FTC’s catchy slogan of “protecting America’s consumers.”

The FTC’s official statement on the subject is, “Self-regulation may be the preferable approach for this dynamic marketplace.” With this being the way it is, new legislation won’t even be considered until the new President takes charge next January.

This battle has been raging, and now it may be at its all-time worst. With more consumers worrying about their privacy and more companies using behavioral targeting to advertise to potential customers, Internet privacy is a volatile and touchy subject. Without help from the FTC, this problem will not figure itself out. Limits will be tested and boundaries pushed by companies to see how far they can take the tracking and recording of private information without getting in trouble for it.

While self-regulation is a start, governments needs to step in and do something. Self-regulating is not the final solution, especially when the two sides are on completely different ends of the spectrum…it will be difficult to self-regulate when the corporations want more information and the consumers don’t want their privacy invaded. FTC regulations would make everything uniform and consistent.

One of the comments to the article stated it in the best words possible when considering using only self-regulation: It’s like letting the fox guard then hen house…

Tweet This Post

Telegraph UK reported that search-engine giant Google, the proud owners of YouTube, were demanded to give up ALL of their users’ information…that is correct. This started mainly because of a suit brought on by media juggernaut Viacom, who accuses Google/YouTube of hosting copyrighted information on the site. Google will have to hand information over to Viacom such your log-in details, viewing history, and the IP address from which you surf. I hope either A.) you didn’t view any copyrighted movies or B.) you are using a proxy server to mask your IP and surf anonymously.

The EFF website also has some information on this subject, which it is calling a “setback to privacy rights.” Viacom owns MTV and Paramount Pictures (among others) and is demanding this information because copyrighted programs have been appearing on YouTube and has led to an “explosion of copyright infringement.” Googling is countering the $1 billion lawsuit by saying it already goes above and beyond any legal expectations to remove copyrighted materials…a strategy which hopefully works out, especially since I don’t think I know a single person who doesn’t go on YouTube.

Viacom has stated they want the user details so they can statistically compare original videos with copyrighted videos to show “the attractiveness of allegedly infringing video with that of non-infringing video” (I smell something…it smells a lot like b.s.).

I am just glad that Google does have the firepower to fight back against Viacom and that the EFF has also made their stance clear. I do not need my log-in details and IP address taken hostage so that a “statistical analysis” can be done. How does my personal information help Viacom conduct these studies? IT DOESN’T. Viacom promises not to pursue legal action against people who watch copyrighted content…so I guess we can trust them since they said they wouldn’t do it. That has never happened before, why would a huge company like Viacom lie?

While Google has been involved in some privacy rights issues recently I am glad to see they are stepping up and fighting back. They are requesting to encrypt and anonymize the logs before sending them over to Viacom so that individual users are not prosecuted, but so that a statistical analysis can be done anonymously.

Tweet This Post

Guardian UK recently published an article updating the information about the E.U./U.S. privacy deal set to make way sometime next year. This deal is intended to help both sides in the war on terrorism. The two agreed in “principle” but still have numerous unresolved issues.

This deal would be a breakthrough, according to the article, for the U.S. since it faces very strict E.U. privacy laws when trying to find information on a suspected terrorist or criminal. Credit card transactions, travel history, and Internet habits are all protected by the E.U. (Look back at this previous post about U.S. and E.U. privacy laws).

While both sides want to get the ball rolling and make this happen, they do recognize that many issues still need to be resolved. Further they are not in a hurry to make something happen at the expense of citizens’ privacy rights. This is especially true with the recent criticisms that have come about from other deals made between the two, especially one where the E.U. gave the U.S. access to private data about passengers traveling to the U.S. A key issue is the misuse of information, which, if happens, will allow E.U. citizens to sue the U.S. under the U.S. privacy act.

Some principles have been agreed on, while others are still being figured out. One of the major principles is that, “information revealing a person’s racial or ethnic origins, political, religious or philosophical views and health or sexual behavior, may not be processed unless domestic legislation provides appropriate safeguards…people should be told about use of their data, which must be supervised by an independent authority.”

Ultimately, I like this idea…assuming the two stay on the right track and continue progress towards ensuring the average Joe is protected. It definitely seems like every intention is being made to protect us…only time will tell how this plays out.

Tweet This Post