[opendtv] Re: FCC privacy rules can't stop ‘gold rush’ in personal data | InfoWorld
- From: Craig Birkmaier <brewmastercraig@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 23:19:03 -0400
On Mar 18, 2016, at 9:30 PM, Manfredi, Albert E
<albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Sounds to me like the steps the FCC wants to take are the least they can do,
Craig.
I'm not worried about "the least they can do" Bert.
I'm worried about all the things they will do incrementally over time.
And I am concerned that putting handcuffs on one set of competitors will do
nothing to keep the rest from continuing to invade our privacy. But that's the
way things work in your neighborhood. Industries are constantly lobbying for
competitive advantage. We discuss this all the time.
You seem impressed that the European Union has implemented stronger protections
for personal privacy than the United States. If you paid any attention to what
I have been saying, you would understand that I agree we need to do more to
protect everyone's privacy. But the FCC does not have the authority to do that,
and I do not want to grant a regulatory agency even more power.
We have a Constitutional way to do that. It is called legislation.
We can write laws, as the EU has done, that regulate the behavior of ALL of the
companies that are selling our personal data.
The article hardly shares your libertarian ideas.
Your opinion.
The article highlights exactly what I have been saying - limiting to ability of
ISPs to collect and sell our personal data does nothing to keep all the
companies the FCC cannot regulate from expanding their efforts to profit from
our data. From the article:
It's an appealing story in contrasts. Unfortunately, the privacy advocates
heralding the FCC's "strict new privacy rules" and its role as "privacy cop"
have been too quick to celebrate. Ultimately, these changes will do little
to defend consumers' privacy from the increasingly ubiquitous surveillance
of the digital age.
What we seemingly can deal with today is a determined emphasis on "opt-in."
Despite all the predictable hand-wringing from cable industry groups about
"burdensome privacy regulations," the proposed rules say nothing about
prohibition. They're simply about getting permission to do what ISPs have
been quietly doing all along: collecting and selling customers' personal
info. How burdensome for them.
To date, Internet users have been very productive creating -- and giving
away for free -- what Goldman Sachs calls a "gold rush" of personal data.
Theoretically, if every user decided not to opt-in, it would threaten the
flow of information on which the burgeoning telecom-data-as-a-service market
relies -- a field currently worth $24 billion per year and on its way to $79
billion in 2020, according to estimates by 451 Research.
As I have stated, my "libertarian idea" is to require everyone to allow us to
opt-out of data collection and its sale.
But I understand this comes with real costs. Shutting down a $24 billion and
growing industry would have impacts in many other areas of the economy. Or it
could make things more expensive for those who choose to opt out.
And what's more, since you mentioned it, we can always lobby the FCC to do a
lot more.
;-(
That's not the solution; the FCC does not have the authority to do much more.
And I don't want Congress to authorize the FCC to become the "Internet police."
Legislation related to personal privacy, including data collection/sale and
"warrant proof encryption," is something that may be productive, AFTER a well
reasoned public airing of the issues and the economic impacts.
I prefer to let the marketplace deal with these issues. I support companies
like Apple that respect personal privacy, and third parties that create apps
that help block unwanted content and protect my data.
Regards
Craig
Other related posts:
