What does Invasion of privacy means? Is “Privacy” enforced depending on whom or which are the plaintiff and/or the defendant? Is privacy linked exclusively to the instrument used to violate it?
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission proposed a framework for policymakers and businesses to create a more realistic and flexible legal instrument to protect internet users and ensure their privacy. I said realistic and flexible because looking back to the last decade, many policies have been launched in regards online customer protection but the rapid and changing performance of the technology has left them behind.
Internationally talking, many others countries have set efforts to solve this problem as well. But what is the problem? And what are the consequences involved? It is just the veil of the capitalism which one more time wants to control markets thru colleting and sharing customer’s information? Or it is that governments do not want to lose their unique power to control the information flowing thru the citizen’s minds? As we know companies are more knowledgeable than government in technology and innovation matter.
We have to remember the recent episode between Google and the China government which was asking for censoring the information displayed thru search engines in China to avoid people having access to chat rooms or forums sites where topics such as human’s rights were mention. In 2008, Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez, proposed a Telecommunication Law through which the government would have access to all the information displayed at internet social media websites such as Facebook, Blogger, MSN, IM among others. More recently, a Venezuela’s state electric utility employee was arrested because he posted a message on Twitter that apparently was hurting the credibility of Venezuela’s president. (I would mention that the Venezuelan constitution covers the freedom of speech as well many democratic countries)
So, two main conclusions come to my mind. First, privacy customer’s protection is a fair practice that has to be enforced by businesses and companies worldwide to ensure the well being of buyers, but a more crucial need with a higher priority has to be cover and this is the privacy protection against unscrupulous political systems that attempt to control citizen’s intellect and silence their voices. Second, shouldn’t governments be role models for companies and public in general in regards invasion of privacy? Are antiterrorism policies control the excuse for many countries to sniff people’s computers?
Peace for all countries...
Invasion of privacy definitely depends on whom the plaintiff or the defendant is. If government invades your privacy, they can say they are trying to protect people’s safety. They can make any excuse they want. They are the government, who makes law. What can you expect? To protect your privacy, you have to count on yourself. You have to be careful when you do online shopping, chatting, and etc. You need to use whatever you have to make your computer less vulnerable to privacy invasion.
ReplyDeleteInvasion of privacy definitely depends on whom the plaintiff or the defendant is. If government invades your privacy, they can say they are trying to protect people’s safety. They can make any excuse they want. They are the government, who makes law. What can you expect? To protect your privacy, you have to count on yourself. You have to be careful when you do online shopping, chatting, and etc. You need to use whatever you have to make your computer less vulnerable to privacy invasion.
ReplyDeleteSurely, such thing as online privacy does not exist in many countries when it comes to governmental interests. If government utilizes the argument of better serving society to justify breaches of privacy, couldn’t companies do the same? After all, they are allegedly gathering information to target and serve customers better, even though they directly benefit with a capitalistic gain by doing it. Of course this is an extreme analogy, but when you see government agencies, such as the Federal Trade Commission, fervently trying to develop mechanisms to prevent online privacy violations, one must conclude that the pro online privacy defense is a whole different issue depending on whether the government is the violator or not.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately in many cases different governments have tried to control information flow and the media to avoid criticism and opposition to maintain power, but definitely it should be as you said in your article, privacy is a right that everybody must have. Even governments can understand better the privacy issue after the wikileaks debacle, where is proved that also the most protected information can be vulnerable to privacy violations. Moreover big technology companies such as AOL, Facebook and Google have had troubles protecting the information they receive from users. Definitely, it will not be an easy task for legislation to try to control and protect users, business and governments.
ReplyDeleteYou bring out a very interesting point about how these regulations can also affect our freedom of expression and not just the right to privacy.. It is a bitter truth as to how much the governments around the world can manipulate information to suppress the truth or in most cases to keep up their public image.. This is a battle that has been fought for ages now and not just in the online environment.. In my opininon it would take a lot more than a mere report to set that one right!
ReplyDelete