Moreover, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, the ECPA, also fails to protect users, because of its exceptions based on consent. Additionally, the ECPA only protects content.
Private companies, websites, and ISP's will not self-regulate themselves in a manner that will adequately protect users. There is an enormous market for private user information. This is one particular instance where government regulation protecting user privacy would actually protect free speech and privacy interests.
Actually, private companies and websites are almost completely self-regulated. The FTC is sort of a watchdog that makes sure they are not deceiving users, but because there is currently no legislation that can protect us, we have to hope that companies will do the right thing with our information they gather. I do agree that government regulation can help protect free speech and privacy interests, but as I'm learning more about this issue, it's a lot easier said than done. There are numerous privacy bills floating around in congressional committees right now and two in particular that address your concerns directly. If you want to learn more about them, they are H.R. 611 and H.R. 654.
ReplyDeleteI agree that more needs to be done, especially in regards to defamation. The Communications Deceny Act grants ISPs almost absolute immunity from content posted by third party individuals. This law has complicated defamation law, because it leaves the person who has been defamed with little or no legal remedy. They essentially have two choices, first find out who posted the comment, which can be difficult in and of itself or sue the ISP. However, the CDA protects the ISP, so that normally isn't an option. Furthermore, if they can't find out who posted the comment they are essentially out of luck. I understand that ISPs normally have nothing to do with the comment, but is giving them this much immunity a smart thing to do?
ReplyDeleteAll of the information that is available to others is no doubt very scary. We talked in class a couple of weeks ago about the emerging business of providing a service that helps to clear the past history of an individual's usage of the internet. It is not exactly clear to me at this point in time what all remains on our social pages once it has been deleted. Does it remain forever? Can it be cleaned away? There is very little privacy on the internet. It will be interesting to see if this is completely eroded away with time or if privacy laws will be strengthened when it comes to the internet.
ReplyDeleteWhat is frightening to me in regards to privacy and autonomy on-line, is the broad subpoena powers that exist under some civil statutes and the fact that in some cases ISPs will hand over similar identifying information as could be achieved in a subpoena simply because someone asked for it. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act for instance provides in part that a party claiming copyright is granted the ability to get a subpoena compelling an ISP to divulge user information of the alleged infringer. The request is made to the clerk of the District Court to subpoena the ISP for identification of the alleged infringer. The bare-bones request requires little more than a claim of copyright and the identification and location of the material allegedly infringing, as well as a proposed subpoena and a sworn declaration that the information will be used for the protection of copywrite and nothing else. The subpoena would require the ISP to expeditiously disclose sufficient information to identify the alleged infringer. If the request is made in “proper form” the clerk of court will issue the subpoena to the ISP. The chilling effect of these types of subpoenas is unknown because most go unreported, even to the person against whom the subpoena is issued, but I would assume the ripple effect of this lack of privacy could be profound.
ReplyDelete