ACLU's Marv Johnson on Postal Service report and privacy [priv][fs]

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

Delivered-To: dfarber+ () ux13 sp cs cmu edu
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 09:21:15 -0500
From: Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>

Subject: RE: [Politech] Implications of report by Postal Service 
commission[priv][fs]
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 11:43:38 -0500
Thread-Index: AcOlSEDBUKxBPR3VR/W8cIbS9tdV2QAA0dyg
From: "Johnson, Marvin" <MJohnson () dcaclu org>
To: "Declan McCullagh" <declan () well com>

Declan: The decentralization does NOT mitigate the privacy concerns. The 
report states at page 147 that the Postal Service is to explore the 
feasibility of requiring "every piece of mail to include sender 
identification." On page 148, the report states: "The Commission recommends 
that the Postal Service, in coordination with the Department of Homeland 
Security, study the development of sender-identification reuirements for 
all mail. Issues of privacy should, of course, be noted and balanced with 
the value of enhanced safety. As a part of the study, the Postal Service 
should additionally explore the potential of technology to transition stamp 
purchasing equipment (e.g. vending machines, cash machines, self-service 
kiosks, post office counter sales, the Postal Service Website, and postage 
meters) from the provision of general stamps to 'personalized stamps' that 
automatically embed sender identification."

How technically feasible this is I can't say, but clearly the direction the 
USPS will be going if all the recommendations are adopted is to require ID 
before you can even BUY a stamp.

The Commission pays lip service to privacy concerns, but plainly 
misunderstands the concept of privacy and the right to anonymous 
communication protected under the First Amendment. Starting on page 147: 
"Requiring all mail to identify its sender would likely have a negligible 
impact on most users of the Postal Service who readily identify themselves 
when they send mail and would consider such a requirement a relatively 
modest concession to ensure their safety and that of the men and women who 
deliver the nation's mail. The greatest inconvenience, most certainly, 
would be to those who use the mail system for unlawful purposes, since such 
a move would hand law-enforcement a powerful new tool to identify and 
prevent such abuse." Thus, the Commission figures only criminals have 
something to hide, ignoring all of the legitimate reasons one might want 
the privacy and anonymity recognized by the Supreme Court as protected by 
the First Amendment.

Relying on decentralization as a protection for privacy and anonymity is 
just sticking one's head in the sand!

Marv Johnson
ACLU
_______________________________________________
Politech mailing list
Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)

-------------------------------------
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/