This story appeared
on Network World at
http://www.networkworld.com/columnists/2013/020513-bradner.html
Apparently
we can wait: Obama's online privacy effort
'Net Insider By
Scott Bradner, Network World
February 05, 2013 10:17 AM ET
It has now been just about a year since
the Obama administration put forth its online
privacy blueprint. In spite of a title on the
announcement that insisted "We Can't Wait," not much has happened
since the blueprint was published. Meanwhile, things are heating up on the
online privacy front in Europe, and the contrast between the United States and
European viewpoints is and is not stark.
The Obama administration blueprint
starts off with the clearly nonsensical statement that "The consumer data
privacy framework in the United States is, in fact, strong." There is
nothing that could remotely be called a "consumer data privacy
framework" in the United States. Every company that collects information
about you and me is free to do whatever it wants with that data, except for
some narrow exceptions around medical records and quirky things like videotape rental
records, and there is an attempt to dilute even
that exception. There is nothing in the United States that says you, as the
person some data is about, has any right to know that the data exists or what
it will be used for (never mind having any say in how it can be used).
The European Union
(EU) rules are a lot stronger and may be getting stronger still, and many
in the United States are not
happy about the prospect.
The broad picture that the Obama
blueprint paints is not all that different from a surface reading of the EU
rules. The Obama blueprint's six consumer rights (individual control,
transparency, respect for context, access and accuracy, focused collection and
accountability) sound quite like the EU's seven principles (notice, purpose,
consent, security,
disclosure, access and accountability).
One of the basic differences is in the
definition of "accountability." In both the U.S. and the EU a data holder
is supposed to be accountable for abiding by the principles of consumer rights.
In the EU, governmental authorities have big sticks they can use to punish data
holders who do not do their part -- up to 2% of a company's annual revenue
under the proposed updates.
In the United States there is far less
of a governmental role. The Obama blueprint proposes to strengthen the role of
the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in enforcement, but historically the FTC has
been more of a kitten than a tiger when it comes to enforcement. Most of the
time the FTC gets a company to agree to not be bad again and to pay a fine that
represents a small percentage of the extra money the company made from the
violation. The Obama blueprint wants "a sustained commitment of all stakeholders
to address consumer data privacy issues as they arise from advances in
technologies and business models." "Commitment" is all well and
good, but a few big sticks might meaningfully increase the level of commitment.
Having said all that, some movement
toward the Obama blueprint would be nice. I can understand why there was not
much movement in an election year but, with President
Obama re-elected, it is time to move. Some progress here might avert the worst
of the trade war with the EU predicted
by one U.S. official. It might also be good for you and me, whose data is
cached in places we have no idea even exist.
Disclaimer:
Harvard, I assume, obeys EU rules when in
the EU but has expressed no opinion on either the Obama blueprint or the
updated EU rules. So the above is my desire for a tiny bit of privacy.
All contents
copyright 1995-2013 Network World, Inc. http://www.networkworld.com