At 2:33 PM -0700 5/31/97, Marc Rotenberg wrote:
It's an interesting argument. I don't agree, though you can certaintly try it. But more to the point of
Oh, I don't intend to "try it." The Supreme Court is far past ever restoring basic constitutional rights. Instead of "trying it," better to monkeywrench it.
your original post, is the information that TransUnion sold to Lexis/Nexis for P-TRAK "public information"? If yes, what is private information?
It all depends on what was agreed to, tacitly or explicitly, in the process of applying for and accepting a credit card. I seem to recall "agreeing to" multiple pages of fine print about how and to whom information could be disclosed. That most of us ignore such fine print is our problem....I don't think there's been any allegation, even by you, Marc, that what Equifax is doing with credit information is breaking either the contract or any existing laws. You just want a new set of laws to do what contracts are perfectly capable of doing. Those who want protection of information disclosed to others should, of course, make such arrangements. (And such arrangements are made all the time. Examples abound.) That such arrangements for a "privacy card" are not easy to make is not an issue for the law to meddle with. In fact, many of us think there's a market for just such a "privacy card," and, absent meddling by government, expect such a card to appear
I agree that there are real threats to cyber freedom in Europe. I'm not saying otherwise. But my point is that anonymous remailers and the like will have a better future in countries that recognize a right of anonymity as opposed to those that don't.
Despite my dislike of most of what passes for the American system, I'll take the protections of the First, augmented with the 1956 "anonymous leafletting" Supreme case, over the "ad hoc" protections nearly all Europeans have (or don't have).
The question is what are you going to do with companies that won't let you buy a product unless you provide your True Name?
The answer to this is both simple and profound. You have heard the answer many times, but you probably dismiss it as just libertarian rhetoric. In any mutually uncoerced transaction, say between Alice and Bob, whether Alice and Bob are individuals, groups, corporations, or whatever, each may "ask for" various things. You can imagine some things to be asked for. Either is free to decline the terms of the other and call off the transaction. (I'm not a lawyer, but I believe this is covered in Contracts. Not meaning to be snide, but it's essential that people realize _contracts_ are what we are talking about here.) So, were a company to refuse to sell me a product unless I provided my True Name, I would decide just how important this issue is to me. If it were of compelling interest to me, I would walk away from the transaction. (There is no "right" to buy something from someone.) In reality, I cannot remember the last time a store demanded a True Name, except when: a) credit (check or credit card or loan) was involved, or b) the government demanded such a True Name. The first situation is avoided by paying cash, using a deposit, etc. The second situation is not so easily avoided. But I submit that the hypo of a company refusing to sell a product unless a True Name is given is unlikely in the extreme, and is not any kind of justification for a new set of so-called privacy laws which actually interfere with other basic rights.
One of the consequences of legal obligations on companies that collect personal information might be to encourage more payment anonymous, psuedo-anonymous payment schemes. Wouldn't that be a good result?
If privacy is important to an agent, make it part of the contractual arrangement. Again, this is already done in a huge array of cases. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."