[Reader-list] (no subject)

[Kanti Bit]

Dear All,

Here's another interesting article from the June 4
issue of TIME. The good news is some EU nations think
they should pass laws restricting use of personal
information.  

The link to this article is:
<http://www.time.com/time/interactive/ethics/datamining_np.html>

Protecting the Private I 

Big Brother is watching the Net. Do you know how much
he knows about you? Do you care? 

By ESTHER DYSON 

Do we need a new privacy to match the new economy? Not
long ago, I saw a survey that asked business people
questions such as whether it's ethical to listen to
employees' phone calls or read their e-mails. But it
didn't raise the key issue: Do the emplo-yees know? If
your friend Alice tells you something, is it O.K. to
tell your other friend, Juan? It all depends on what
Alice expects of you. And if there's any doubt, you
should ask her. 

These simple principles are so obvious that it's
amazing people forget them when it comes to the
Internet. The basic standard still applies: If in
doubt, ask. 

Of course, things are different on the Net. First of
all, almost all relationships are between strangers,
especially those between merchants and customers.
Should a seller have to ask what he can do with the
transaction data each time a sale is made? That's a
big burden for both parties. Moreover, many merchants
would prefer not to delve too deeply into all of this.
They would rather just assume that their
information-collection methods are O.K. and use the
data as they see fit. They argue that everything would
be more expensive if they couldn't use marketing
information effectively: Internet content would no
longer be free. Besides, they add, people know what's
going on anyway and really don't mind. 

While many consumers in fact don't have problems with
all of this, some do. Certainly, their preferences
vary—so why not ask what they are? That's what
computers are meant for: to manage lots of
information, including details as to how consumers
want their data used. True, many users, if you were to
ask them to actively consent to the use of their data,
simply wouldn't bother. The process of making an
explicit choice is a burden for customers as well as
for merchants.

What's the solution? To most people a problem is a
problem, but to some—especially those building the New
Economy (despite its current travails)—a problem is an
opportunity. Many companies, from Microsoft to small
start-ups, are building tools that allow users to
specify their privacy preferences and then communicate
automatically with websites using a standard language
called P3P. The websites also state their privacy
policies in P3P, and then the computers figure out if
they match. Some of the systems require you to store
your data with the vendor; others let you manage
everything yourself. Some of these firms will succeed,
some won't. Some are trustworthy, some may not be.

And that brings us to the second part of the solution.
What should governments be doing? Some, most notably
in the European Union, think they should pass laws
restricting the use of personal data. Others, like the
U.S., restrict the use of medical information but are
pretty lax on almost everything else. Still others
haven't addressed the issue. (And all are hampered by
the fact that their citizens use websites outside
their own country and beyond their own government's
control.) 

Although some oversight is helpful, especially for
medical or government-mandated information, I think
this basic approach is wrong. Let's go back to the
first principle: people have different preferences and
sensitivities about the use of their personal
information. Many like free content and well-targeted
marketing offers. So why not let the market work? Let
websites disclose their practices in an intelligible
way and then let consumers choose.

But there are some things governments should do. One
is to educate people to look for and understand
privacy practices. Another is to prosecute any company
that does not observe the privacy standard it pledges
to uphold. And lastly, companies should be required to
disclose their data-handling and security commitments
to investors and insurance companies, so they can be
factored into financial decisions. Privacy policies
are confusing for any consumer. But in a world where
attention to consumer desires matter (and where
careless use of data can lead to liability and
prosecution), an investor or insurer whose job it is
to assess a company's long-term prospects has a strong
interest in understanding what a company promises and
whether it can deliver.

Ultimately, consumer opinion does matter to the more
committed vendors. You personally have an opportunity
to weigh in on this debate, both by your behavior and
through direct feedback. Demand data-use information
and use it to pick which sites you do business with.
And send e-mails to companies whose policies you like
or dislike. All those data-tracking tools mean that
your opinion will be counted! 

Esther Dyson is chairman of EDventure Holdings and
author of Release 2.1: A Design for Living in the
Digital Age. She invests in I.T. start-ups in the U.S.
and Europe, including Russia 


--------

Kanti Kumar