PRIVACYnotes

Privacy in Public
 

Home | Privacy Links | Opt-Out

   



Archive


PRIVACYnotes #1

PRIVACYnotes #2
PRIVACYnotes #3
PRIVACYnotes #4
PRIVACYnotes #5
PRIVACYnotes #6
PRIVACYnotes #7
PRIVACYnotes #8
PRIVACYnotes #9
PRIVACYnotes #10
PRIVACYnotes #11
PRIVACYnotes #12
PRIVACYnotes #13
PRIVACYnotes #14
PRIVACYnotes #15
PRIVACYnotes #16
PRIVACYnotes #17
PRIVACYnotes #18
PRIVACYnotes #19
PRIVACYnotes #20
PRIVACYnotes #21
PRIVACYnotes #22
PRIVACYnotes #23
PRIVACYnotes #24
PRIVACYnotes #25
PRIVACYnotes #26
PRIVACYnotes #27
PRIVACYnotes #28
PRIVACYnotes #29
PRIVACYnotes #30
PRIVACYnotes #31
PRIVACYnotes #32
PRIVACYnotes #33
PRIVACYnotes #34
PRIVACYnotes #35
PRIVACYnotes #36
PRIVACYnotes #37
PRIVACYnotes #38
PRIVACYnotes #39
PRIVACYnotes #40
PRIVACYnotes #41
HIPAA

PRIVACYnotes Discussion List
Security Protecting Privacy is Good for Business

Respecting Privacy on the Web

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Privacynotes Digest
Security Protecting Privacy is Good for Business
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Published by: Mike Banks Valentine Privacynotes
privacy@privacynotes.com www.privacynotes.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
October 17, 2002 Issue # 030
----------------------------------------------------------------------

.....IN THIS DIGEST.....

// -- MODERATOR COMMENT -- //

"Digital ID World" ~ Mike Banks Valentine

// -- NEW DISCUSSION -- //

"Cookies and Privacy" ~ Nancy Preiss ~ Moderator Comment

// -- CONTINUING DISCUSSION -- //

"Privacy in Public" ~ Jim Stanley ~ Anonymous

// -- PRIVACY NEWS -- //

"The Latest in Privacy Issues"

----------------------------------------------------------------------

// -- MODERATOR COMMENT -- //

==> TOPIC: DIGITAL ID WORLD

This past week I attended the Digital ID World Conference in Denver. The show was sponsored by Microsoft, 1to1 magazine and PingID. Each of which offer distinctly different identity management views/solutions. I'll be writing up a show review with some surprising thoughts coming from a privacy advocate and will post that review to my own site when completed.

I'll say now that I expect to raise some eyebrows with that review.

With that, let's get on to this week's discussion!

 

// -- NEW DISCUSSION -- //

===> TOPIC: COOKIES AND PRIVACY

From: Nancy Preiss

Today's Dubious Achievement Award goes to Cookie Central.

Veronica Yuill followed my posted link to the site and then sent in this note: "I was amused in an ironic sort of way to note that Cookie Central tried to drop a 3rd-party cookie from ValueClick on my PC! The site then duly exposes the "dark side" of exactly this type of cookie here: http://www.cookiecentral.com/content.phtml?area=2&id=2 <sigh> ... Who can you trust??"

Hmmm, who can we trust? Good question. No good answer.

As Internet Pros (or aspiring Internet Pros) the best we can do is educate ourselves and our clients. Privacy Boundaries are a personal issue- I tend to be a rather private sort, while those on the Jerry Springer show clearly have little, if any, boundaries :->.

According to Rebecca Hines, Ken Dzugan's Career Directions site is committing a Security/Privacy Faux Pas: She notes in her site review that, "The Send Order (normal) takes the buyer to a non-secure page where you collect their credit card information."

Folks, a lot of people are clueless about security issues- witness the emails I get from earnest eBay-ers sending me their credit card data, unsecure and unencrypted. We need to be vigilant and protect our customers!

It's sooo easy for me to get up on that soap box when I feel passionate about an issue. Maybe I should moderate Privacynotes? That's not going to happen.

[ Moderator Comment ]:

[This post was culled from sister publication, I-Helpdesk, with permission]. No Nancy, but you should POST to Privacynotes! I'd love to have privacy discussions in the PRIVACY forum and can't see why you wouldn't moderate Privacynotes sometimes. But you'll only be asked if we're aware of your passionate interest! Hop on over and make your comments here!

 

// -- CONTINUING DISCUSSION -- //

==> TOPIC: PRIVACY IN PUBLIC PLACES

From: Jim Stanley

Mike Valentine said: >> Do Americans have a right of privacy while in public places? <<

There has never been privacy in public places. By their very nature one must assume that there is always at least one watcher.

At some point a laser pointer will be used to blind a camera to prevent it from recording a crime. That is obstruction of justice, or that is how the courts will see it. From there it is a small step to say it is illegal to blind cameras.

As far as acting out a crime. Is it a crime if the actions seen is perceived as a crime? I think the ultimate answer lies in the two facts

1). The justice system is not about truth but the control of the populace - ideally to proper public behavior.

2). How much control is to be exerted on the populace.

In the end people will learn how to circumvent the intrusion of the camera hiding their actions when appropriate.

 

==> TOPIC: PRIVACY IN PUBLIC PLACES

From: Anonymous By Request

No American has a right to privacy while in public places and in this day and age cannot really expect to have a right to privacy anywhere from virtually anyone.

The government has in effect taken those rights away. But we'll have a look at that in a moment.

There have been several court cases that have decided the right to privacy while in public places. In one of those, a lawsuit was brought against some residents of an apartment complex, who, with the aid of binoculars, were attempting to bring into closer view the attributes of young women swimming and tanning in the communal pool. The plaintiffs lost.

We all act up for the cameras. Just be a part of any family gathering or gathering of friends. Witness the antics of affinity groups. While in public places, these gatherings are subject to no privacy rights; if the gathering is on private property then privacy rights may apply if cameras are being used long distance.

As for any make believe or pretend acts being committed no damages occur if harm has not been done or inflicted. That goes for movies, TV and so on, for the actions are being simulated. No damage occurs.

Try to tell that though to the government.

In the case of the young man who "zaps" cameras, he may do this so far with impunity. But the relevant government agency in time will likely make an administrative ruling or pass a statute which will render him and others to subsequent prosecution though no harm or damages occur to anyone. And they have already passed statutes that infringe upon your privacy in a public place. The highway and roads are public places; but go and browse some radar detector sites.

In many states, "they" have passed laws which do not permit the driver to interfere with the camera or the "tax enhancement device", in other words the speed trap measurement instrument. If you blind the camera or do not allow the device to record your speed and you are caught you will get a citation and a court case a year or so ago says the police can handcuff you and arrest you and lock you up for a relatively minor infraction --- like trying to stop a photo being taken of you in a public place.

So, anyone who lives in America must not expect any privacy rights in public places.

And do not expect any privacy rights anywhere from any government agency. Long ago and increasingly so in this day and age, the citizens of the US have long allowed the slow erosion of particularly the Fourth Amendment; in this they have been aided and abetted by courts all the way up to the Supreme Court.

For those who are interested in retaining a vestige of privacy, we are fighting a losing battle. Our lives are an open book; we are numbered, branded, headlined and recorded, both by private and business concerns; if we do try to remain private, we are accused of having something to hide!

And if we have done nothing wrong, why should we worry seems to the prevailing view!

Plenty there is to worry about. Have a look at the new ACLU website; browse Statewatch.org, a British organisation, where there are myriads of stories about the Europeans being browbeaten by American agencies into dumping their privacy rights; and these agencies are winning.

Please do not link to The NY Times. They require you to register, a surrender of privacy! There are many other publications that can stimulate without registration.

 

// -- PRIVACY NEWS -- //

Moderator note: There are two ways to access previously listed privacy news stories. One is to visit Privacynotes archives, the other (simpler) way is to visit

http://privacynotes.com/privacy_news.html where I also keep a privacy news archive.

Buena Vista County officials have pulled out of a landmark legal feud with Planned Parenthood over pregnancy records.Tom Miller, Iowa's attorney general, asked the Iowa Supreme Court on Wednesday to send the case back to a lower court so the Buena Vista County attorney can withdraw a court order demanding pregnancy - test records from the Planned Parenthood clinic in Storm Lake. After a newborn boy was found dead at a county recycling center in May, Buena Vista County investigators asked area hospitals and clinics for the records. Planned Parenthood's lawyers will ask justices this week to give Nelson that authority, director Jill June said. Even if Nelson drops the court orders, Planned Parenthood officials must go back to the Supreme Court to ask for a dismissal, June said. Justices could decide to move forward with a decision, she said. "The privacy rights of these patients are still in jeopardy."

http://www.dmregister.com/news/stories/c4788993/19433042.html

New Frequently Asked Questions About the HIPAA Privacy Rule are now available directly from the HHS web site as a Word Document download and in PDA format.

http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/hipaa/whatsnew.html

 

privacy@website101.com 5318 E. 2nd St. #789 Long Beach, CA 90803