IP: USA TODAY :Privacy self regulation "meaningless"

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

> From: "Rodger, William" <wrodger () usatoday com>
> To: "'farber () cis upenn edu'" <farber () cis upenn edu>
> Subject: USA TODAY :Privacy self regulation "meaningless"
> Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 17:26:48 -0400
>
>
>
> From:
>
> http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20000523/2287199s.htm
> <http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20000523/2287199s.htm>
>
> May 23, 2000
>
> Page 28A
>
> Net privacy promises again come up short
>
> Two years ago, a Federal Trade Commission survey found an alarming lack of
> privacy policies among Web sites that collect lots of personal information.
> The industry's response was: Don't worry; we'll take care of it.
>
> Then last year, an independent survey found that while many Web sites posted
> privacy policies, few offered meaningful protections. The industry's
> response: Don't worry; we're making progress there, too.
>
> Now a new FTC survey shows that those pledges not only were meaningless but
> also -- when it comes to Internet privacy -- there's plenty of cause for
> concern.
>
> The report, released Monday, found that just one in five commercial Web
> sites offers real privacy protection to visitors, which gives them notice, a
> choice to opt out, access to sensitive data and promises of security.
>
> Small wonder then that the FTC -- until now a fan of industry
> self-regulation -- finally has lost patience. The agency is asking Congress
> for the authority to impose some privacy rules on the online world, a move
> that could go a long way to filling in the privacy gaps that Internet
> companies refuse to fill in on their own.
>
> As it now stands, consumers who want to protect their personal information
> from being aggregated, collated and sold have little recourse.
>
> A USA TODAY review of 10 major Web sites in early May found their policies
> to be a confusing jumble of incomprehensible language riddled with
> loopholes. (http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/cth818.htm)  Yahoo's
> policy, for instance, is eight pages long. The FTC survey found fewer than
> half of the sites had clearly worded procedures.
>
> What's more, privacy-seal programs meant to reassure Web users aren't
> exactly sweeping the Net. Just over 1,400 sites have signed up with the
> industry-sponsored TRUSTe program, and only about 6,000 post the Better
> Business Bureau's seal of approval. That's all of about 8% of commercial Web
> sites, according to the FTC. Slow progress at best in an industry famed for
> moving at a quicksilver pace.
>
> Any hope for federal rules to pick up the slack is a long way off.
> Republican leaders are opposed to regulations that in their view would
> hobble the Internet. And the Clinton administration doesn't want to push the
> issue in an election year.
>
> But privacy protections needn't be overly complex or disruptive to the free
> flow of information so critical to the Internet's success. The rules
> protecting children's online privacy, already in force, have general
> industry backing. And the FTC has said that it wants only modest rules
> linked to continued industry self-policing.
>
> Simply requiring that Web sites write their privacy policies in plain
> English and offer consumers a chance to opt out of data-sharing arrangements
> would be a good start.
>
> The Internet community can be expected to fight any federal privacy role, no
> matter how limited. It already is issuing fresh offers to beef up its own
> efforts, and a new advisory council is set to meet next month.
>
> But after all of these years, who can believe such promises now?
>
>
> Will Rodger                                                  Voice +1 703
> 558 3375
> Technology Reporter                                        Fax +1 703 558
> 3981
> USATODAY.com                                        http://tech.usatoday.com
>
> PGP 584D FD11 3035 0EC2 B35C  AB16 D660 293F C7BE 3F62