Would You Surrender Your Privacy for A Chocolate Bar?

How valuable is your online privacy? Would you pay for it? Or would you, like some research subjects, surrender your computer password in exchange for a chocolate bar or a cup of premium coffee? Tech critic Declan McCullagh used the occasion of Data Privacy Day 2010 to ponder these questions…

Data Privacy Day, Education, and Action

Happy Data Privacy Day! Data Privacy Day (January 28, 2010) encourages a dialogue among businesses, individuals, government agencies, non-profit groups, academics, teachers and students about how advanced technologies affect our daily lives. This dialogue connects directly with ALA’s effort to spark a national conversation about privacy in America and we are pleased to recognize this event! It’s been a busy week in the realm of privacy and technology…

Choose Privacy Week event in Boston

You’re invited! Help us launch Choose Privacy Week at a fun and exciting event, featuring Hal Niedzviecki, author of The Peep Diaries: How We’re Learning to Love Watching Ourselves and Our Neighbors. The event will take place during the ALA 2010 Midwinter Meeting from 4 – 5 p.m. on Saturday, January 16...

Digital Marketing, Privacy & the Public Interest

Protecting Privacy, Promoting Consumer Rights and Ensuring Corporate Accountability

Perhaps the most powerful - but largely invisible - force shaping our digital media reality is the role of interactive advertising and marketing. Much of our online experience, from websites to search engines to social networks, is being shaped to better serve advertisers. Increasingly, individuals are being electronically "shadowed" online, our actions and behaviors observed, collected, and analyzed so that we can be "micro-targeted." Now a $24 billion a year industry [2008 estimates] in the U.S., with expected dramatic growth to $80 billion or more by 2011, the goal of interactive marketing is to use the awesome power of new media to deeply engage you in what is being sold: whether it's a car, a vacation, a politician or a belief. An explosion of digital technologies, such as behavioral targeting and retargeting, "immersive" rich media, and virtual reality, are being utilized to drive the market goals of the largest brand advertisers and many others.

A major infrastructure has emerged to expand and promote the interests of this sector, including online advertising networks, digital marketing specialists, and trade lobbying groups.

The role which online marketing and advertising plays in shaping our new media world, including at the global level, will help determine what kind of society we will create.

Will online advertising evolve so that everyone's privacy is truly protected?
Will there be only a few gatekeepers determining what editorial content should be supported in order to better serve the interests of advertising, or will we see a vibrant commercial and non-commercial marketplace for news, information, and other content necessary for a civil society?
Who will hold the online advertising industry accountable to the public, making its decisions transparent and part of the policy debate?
Will the more harmful aspects of interactive marketing - such as threats to public health - be effectively addressed?

CDD's project works to keep the public informed and the online ad industry accountable.

Promoting Public Health in the Digital Era

The new media can be a boon to fostering healthy behaviors, including access to more information about drugs and lifestyle choices. But marketers also have the power to encourage the consumption of products and drugs that may be harmful to one's health. From investigating the online marketing of unhealthy food and beverages to children and teens to analyzing the threats from digital marketing of prescription and over-the-counter drugs, CDD is working to promote global public health.

(More - Digitalads.org)

Web 2.0 in the Public Interest

Today’s media system is not a top-down environment, but a “web 2.0” world where each of us can create the content and tell our own story. The key to cultivating this space, is to take our digital destiny into our own hands, by working together in communities across the country to help build a digital media system where democracy, fairness, creative opportunity and social justice are key measures for success.

The U.S. media system is undergoing a profound transformation as the Internet and other digital media reshape communications, commerce, community, and political power. Billions have been invested to build and define a system where the majority of global citizens will always be connected to interactive communications networks--via computers, cell phones, and other new devices. But will this world of broadband video, instant messaging, social networks, and video games give us a media system where the public interest is paramount?

In a way that traditional media was never able to, the powerful forces of interactive media can help our country address critical social issues such as:

Economic opportunity for the poor and working middle class
New approaches to solve the environmental crisis
Divisions within the education and health care systems

If news, cultural and civic-oriented content came directly from the public—and not just a few private interests—then more accountability and responsibility would follow. By embracing Web 2.0 concepts and tools – starting with socially conscious social networks (SCSN) – greater democracy will be able to flourish under a brighter media future.

Guardian column on LibDem proposal to block web-lockers

For my Guardian column today, I took the LibDem Lords to task for introducing legislation that would ban web-lockers because these services allow for copyright infringement. I won't argue that copyright infringement takes place on services like Google Docs and YouSendIt, but the reason that these services are great for piracy is that they're great [...]Read More »

Adult Photography Record-Keeping and Inspection Law Threatens Free Speech, Privacy

San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed a friend-of-the-court brief today urging a federal court judge to block two criminal statutes that unconstitutionally limit the free expression of millions of adults who use the Internet and other electronic forms of communication, bringing the threat of criminal sanctions for private, lawful speech.

At issue are provisions of federal law that require anyone who produces a visual depiction of sexually explicit expression to maintain extensive records -- including copies of drivers' licenses, the dates and times images were taken, and all URLs where images were posted -- and often force public disclosure of a creator's home address. Even more troubling, the regulations allow law enforcement warrantless entry into homes or offices in order to inspect the records that are supposed to be kept. While these statutes regulate the commercial pornography industry, they also likely apply to a staggering number of Americans who create and share images of themselves over social networks, online dating services, personal erotic websites, and text messaging.

"The plain language of the statute subjects ordinary Americans, who are using emerging communications technologies at an ever-increasing rate, to onerous record-keeping and inspection requirements for lawful speech. They could face up to five years in prison if they don't follow the statutory requirements to the letter," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Matt Zimmerman. "Speakers who engage in private, expressive activity protected by the First Amendment should not be at risk of criminal sanctions for violating an overbroad statute that they likely know nothing about."

A coalition of artists, producers, distributors, and educators filed suit against the provisions last year, arguing that the law censored their artistic and educational work. In its amicus brief in support of the coalition filed today, EFF asked the judge to throw out the record-keeping regulations as an unconstitutional chill on adult free expression in the digital age.

"Digital cameras, camcorders, and the Internet make it easy to create and share lawful adult material in a wide variety of ways. Thousands of ordinary Americans are doing just that, only to find themselves subject to these record-keeping and inspection requirements," said EFF Civil Liberties Director Jennifer Granick. "This just doesn't square with the Constitution."

For the full amicus brief:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/fsc_v_holder/EFF%20Amicus%20Brief.pdf

For more on Free Speech Coalition v. Holder:
http://www.eff.org/cases/free-speech-coalition-v-holder

Contacts:

Matt Zimmerman
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
mattz@eff.org

Jennifer Stisa Granick
Civil Liberties Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
jennifer@eff.org

German Court Declares Data Retention Law Unconstitutional

On March 2, 2010, the German Federal Constitutional Court ruled that a law allowing law enforcement authorities to store telephone and Internet data is inconsistent with the right to privacy under the German Constitution. The law allows data on calls and e-mail exchanges to be retained for six months, and made available for use by criminal authorities. The court found that the law went beyond the original intent of the directive the European Union enacted in March 2006. EPIC has documented the impact of data retention requirements. For more information, see EPIC’s webpage on data retention.
Read More »

Travelport becomes first CRS to claim it complies with EU privacy law

This week Travelport — the holding company that owns two of the big four Computerized Reservation Systems (CRSs) or Global Distribution Systems (GDSs) — announced that it has “certified” that it complies with “Safe Harbor” privacy and data protection principles for companies that want to be eligible to receive transfers to the US of personal [...]
Read More »

LifeLock Will Pay $12 Million to Settle Charges by the FTC and 35 States That Identity Theft Prevention and Data Security Claims Were False

LifeLock, Inc. has agreed to pay $11 million to the Federal Trade Commission and $1 million to a group of 35 state attorneys general to settle charges that the company used false claims to promote its identity theft protection services, which it widely advertised by displaying the CEO’s Social Security number on the side of [...]
Read More »

NextGov: Generational Views on Privacy

NextGov reports on a presentation at the RSA Conference about privacy by security expert Bruce Schneier. The session focused on the responsibilities that all generations currently hold to protect privacy and ensure individuals, not technological systems, have control. Young people are used to living very public lives, Schneier said, but they also put a high priority on [...]
Read More »

Marc Rotenberg on Google's Italian Privacy Case

Interesting commentary:

I don't think this is really a case about ISP liability at all. It is a case about the use of a person's image, without their consent, that generates commercial value for someone else. That is the essence of the Italian law at issue in this case. It is also how the right of privacy was first established in the United States.
The video at the center of this case was very popular in Italy and drove lots of users to the Google Video site. This boosted advertising and support for other Google services. As a consequence, Google actually had an incentive not to respond to the many requests it received before it actually took down the video.

Back in the U.S., here is the relevant history: after Brandeis and Warren published their famous article on the right to privacy in 1890, state courts struggled with its application. In a New York state case in 1902, a court rejected the newly proposed right. In a second case, a Georgia state court in 1905 endorsed it.

What is striking is that both cases involved the use of a person's image without their consent. In New York, it was a young girl, whose image was drawn and placed on an oatmeal box for advertising purposes. In Georgia, a man's image was placed in a newspaper, without his consent, to sell insurance.

Also important is the fact that the New York judge who rejected the privacy claim, suggested that the state assembly could simple pass a law to create the right. The New York legislature did exactly that and in 1903 New York enacted the first privacy law in the United States to protect a person's "name or likeness" for commercial use.

The whole thing is worth reading.

Supreme Court Takes ‘Informational Privacy’ Case

The U.S. Supreme Court is agreeing to decide how much personal information the federal bureaucracy may acquire on its workers. The justices, without comment, decided Monday to review a lower-court decision surrounding the concept of so-called “informational privacy.” The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco struck down intrusive background checks last year on [...]
Read More »