Interesting People mailing list archives
An important column by Dan Gillmor
From: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 17:02:20 -0400
------ Forwarded Message From: Dan Gillmor <dgillmor () mercurynews com> Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 14:01:18 -0700 To: Dave Farber <dave () farber net> Subject: Re: When did IP start? What year? http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/6293890.htm Privacy rights under threat by lawmakers By Dan Gillmor Mercury News Technology Columnist In the constant battle to preserve what's left of our privacy and roll back some of the invasions we've already suffered, one reality is all too clear: Elected officials are not on our side. Last week brought the latest perversion of the public will, the cowardly refusal of the California Legislature to enact even modest improvements in financial privacy. The voters will do it instead, in a ballot measure next year. Meanwhile, state and federal lawmakers are almost totally oblivious to future threats, including some that should be dealt with before they cause trouble. For example, retailers will soon be installing little identifying radios, a technology known as RFID, into items they sell, enabling a host of new privacy invasions that could make the status quo seem benign. We all understand why lawmakers hold the public good, and will, in such contempt. They tend to vote on behalf of their financial benefactors. Commercial interests see our privacy as a barrier to their business. Game over? No. We have to care enough to take matters into our own hands. Pressuring politicians is vital, but it's plainly not enough. We'll need to do a little multitasking to retrieve our right to be left alone. Californians have more options than most Americans. We can pass our own laws by going over the heads of paid-for public officials, through the ballot initiative process. Through their toadies in Sacramento, the nation's largest financial conglomerates and their allies killed SB 1, an already watered-down bill by State Sen. Jackie Speier, D-San Mateo, in an Assembly committee vote. It would have given us somewhat more ability to prevent the financial giants from peddling our personal information without our specific consent. The legislation's death was a replay of previous years' charades, in which politicians pretended to support financial privacy but somehow couldn't find a way to make it law. A majority of a key committee's members failed to vote, thereby preventing the bill's passage while giving them a way to claim they weren't opposing privacy. They won't get away with it, if their opponents in next year's elections, assisted by the press, hold them to account. The industry that lobbied so effectively won't get away with it, either. Maybe some of these craven legislators will lose in primary elections next March. If so, that will be a delicious dessert for privacy-hungry people, because that's when the state's voters will pass a ``California Financial Privacy Initiative.'' To learn more and find out how you can help get the initiative on the ballot, visit the organizers' Web site ( www.california privacy.org ). The financial giants will fight back, of course. They'll warn of horrific problems if we pass this law, and they'll blanket us with deceptive advertising. But they'll discover, as they did in North Dakota a couple of years ago, that the lies will only reinforce voters' determination to rescue their privacy. Citigroup, Wells Fargo, State Farm and the other conglomerates are going to learn a hard, expensive lesson. They can buy the Legislature, but not the people. The financial industry is nothing if not resourceful. It will surely attempt to pull an end run, asking Congress for a nationwide law that would prohibit individual states from enacting stronger privacy measures. Write your U.S. representative ( www.house.gov ) and senators ( www.senate.gov ), and demand a) that he or she enact serious privacy measures or b) reject moves to further weaken the already inadequate federal laws we have. It may feel futile, but the lawmakers pay attention to letters, especially when they're not part of an organized special-interest campaign. ANOTHER THREAT : Once the financial privacy law goes into effect in California, it'll be time to look into another emerging threat: the tiny, increasingly cheap RFID (radio frequency identification) tags that many companies want to embed in products. They have some good reasons to do this. RFID tags, which could appear in significant numbers within several years, could bring vastly greater efficiency to what's known as the ``supply chain'' from manufacturers' factories to store shelves. Knowing where products are at all times, and then knowing when and where they've been sold so inventories can be maintained at appropriate levels, is plainly a smart and useful idea. But the RFID industry is not being sufficiently straightforward with the public about the privacy implications. If these tags are still working when they leave the store, the surveillance opportunities -- corporate America sees these as research and marketing opportunities -- are obvious and disturbing. Our elected officials should enact laws, soon, that will protect our privacy. Retail RFID tags should be disabled -- with no possibility of revival -- or removed before they leave the stores. Period. The RFID lobby was embarrassed last week when documents describing a deceptive pro-tag public-relations plan were revealed on a Web site at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where some of the development work is taking place. One suggestion was to rename them ``Green Tags,'' apparently to suggest environmental friendliness. (Think ``money'' instead.) This should plainly be a federal issue, but given the overwhelming pro-business tilt in Washington these days, the states may have to take it on themselves. Maybe California's Legislature will do the right thing and save the voters some time and effort. But you have another way of influencing this particular discussion short of another ballot initiative. Wal-Mart is the main retail and corporate force behind the move to RFID, by many accounts, though it may be having second thoughts about an early retail deployment. If you're a Wal-Mart customer, tell the store manager the next time you're there that you will reconsider your shopping behavior if the retailer is primary enabler of such spying. (And please let me know the response.) If Wal-Mart does the right thing, so will others. Some believe it's too late to salvage our privacy, that this kind of advice is useless. I'm not certain they're wrong. But if we don't try, we'll make the worst case the certain one. So let's work on this, together. Dan Gillmor's column appears each Sunday and Wednesday. Visit Dan's online column, eJournal ( www.dangillmor.com ). E-mail dgillmor () mercurynews com ; phone (408) 920-5016; fax (408) 920-5917. ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- An important column by Dan Gillmor Dave Farber (Jul 13)