Who owns Information about us?
I have been surprised at the way US law sees personal data. Companies gather information about you. Everything about you and then make you pay to see what they have gathered if they allow you to see it at all. When the company is negligent with your data and it is stolen the information they gathered and stored then becomes your problem. You spend thousands of dollars to fix the problem. If you decide not to intervene you get threatened by bill collectors and risk losing your job or worse may not be able to get as good a job because someone else has used your information and done something wrong. It is a nightmare and while the company gained significant value from the information about you they have no responsibilities. This is just wrong!
The Supreme Court says you have, “no expectation of privacy!” I say, “Why not?” I am protected from an illegal search executed by the police. Why am I not protected from being violated, beaten, and left alone to financial death at the hands of irresponsible corporations?
The simple answer is that by making corporations responsible they will be less profitable. They will have to spend more money protecting the information they acquire. So again we have congress creating incentives for companies to be less productive, to remain behind the technology curve. Who cares, the real cost is paid by the individual and we citizens have too much money anyway.
There are some solutions that could offer some protection or at least limit the damages. All OPT OUT requirements should be made OPT-IN. No company or individual should be allowed to access your information without a specific request on your part. Driver’s license databases should not be public, access should be granted only when you ask for insurance. Tax roles on property should be encrypted or available only through a specific, motivated request such as contesting rising property taxes. Finally corporate negligence regarding privacy should be a felony where the top management of the company cannot just say, well we did not think about it.
I know I am naïve. That simple right and wrong is not that simple but WE THE PEOPLE need to take back our country and the first step could be to take back our personal lives.
The Supreme Court says you have, “no expectation of privacy!” I say, “Why not?” I am protected from an illegal search executed by the police. Why am I not protected from being violated, beaten, and left alone to financial death at the hands of irresponsible corporations?
The simple answer is that by making corporations responsible they will be less profitable. They will have to spend more money protecting the information they acquire. So again we have congress creating incentives for companies to be less productive, to remain behind the technology curve. Who cares, the real cost is paid by the individual and we citizens have too much money anyway.
There are some solutions that could offer some protection or at least limit the damages. All OPT OUT requirements should be made OPT-IN. No company or individual should be allowed to access your information without a specific request on your part. Driver’s license databases should not be public, access should be granted only when you ask for insurance. Tax roles on property should be encrypted or available only through a specific, motivated request such as contesting rising property taxes. Finally corporate negligence regarding privacy should be a felony where the top management of the company cannot just say, well we did not think about it.
I know I am naïve. That simple right and wrong is not that simple but WE THE PEOPLE need to take back our country and the first step could be to take back our personal lives.
Labels: Corporations, Economy, Financial Institutions, Justice, Populism
posted by Small Business USA at 9:13 AM
2 Comments:
In Australia we have very strict privacy regulations. The one example of the consequences of this regulation is when my wife lodged a claim for workplace injury compensation.The authority handling the claim asked for permission to conduct surveillance of my wife. (Under the privacy act, they need permission to do this) She of course refused to give permission.
There is definitely a need to regulate information collected on individuals without their knowledge or consent.
Lexcen at one time privacy was a basic principle in the US. As the pendulum has swung, giving corporation more power, the individual has simply become prey for the corporate business models.
I think the Australian legislators, as most free world countries, have shown great wisdom by enacting strong privacy laws.
Here in the US we are currently experiencing a fascist state mentality where corporations can do anything and the government can use any means to control the population.
Post a Comment
<< Home