Printed from Urbana-Champaign IMC : http://www.ucimc.org/
UCIMC Independent Media 
Center
Media Centers

[topics]
biotech

[regions]
united states

oceania

germany

[projects]
video
satellite tv
radio
print

[process]
volunteer
tech
process & imc docs
mailing lists
indymedia faq
fbi/legal updates
discussion

west asia
palestine
israel
beirut

united states
worcester
western mass
virginia beach
vermont
utah
urbana-champaign
tennessee
tampa bay
tallahassee-red hills
seattle
santa cruz, ca
santa barbara
san francisco bay area
san francisco
san diego
saint louis
rogue valley
rochester
richmond
portland
pittsburgh
philadelphia
omaha
oklahoma
nyc
north texas
north carolina
new orleans
new mexico
new jersey
new hampshire
minneapolis/st. paul
milwaukee
michigan
miami
maine
madison
la
kansas city
ithaca
idaho
hudson mohawk
houston
hawaii
hampton roads, va
dc
danbury, ct
columbus
colorado
cleveland
chicago
charlottesville
buffalo
boston
binghamton
big muddy
baltimore
austin
atlanta
arkansas
arizona

south asia
mumbai
india

oceania
sydney
perth
melbourne
manila
jakarta
darwin
brisbane
aotearoa
adelaide

latin america
valparaiso
uruguay
tijuana
santiago
rosario
qollasuyu
puerto rico
peru
mexico
ecuador
colombia
chile sur
chile
chiapas
brasil
bolivia
argentina

europe
west vlaanderen
valencia
united kingdom
ukraine
toulouse
thessaloniki
switzerland
sverige
scotland
russia
romania
portugal
poland
paris/ãŽle-de-france
oost-vlaanderen
norway
nice
netherlands
nantes
marseille
malta
madrid
lille
liege
la plana
italy
istanbul
ireland
hungary
grenoble
galiza
euskal herria
estrecho / madiaq
cyprus
croatia
bulgaria
bristol
belgrade
belgium
belarus
barcelona
austria
athens
armenia
antwerpen
andorra
alacant

east asia
qc
japan
burma

canada
winnipeg
windsor
victoria
vancouver
thunder bay
quebec
ottawa
ontario
montreal
maritimes
london, ontario
hamilton

africa
south africa
nigeria
canarias
ambazonia

www.indymedia.org

This site
made manifest by
dadaIMC software
&
the friendly folks of
AcornActiveMedia.com

Comment on this article | View comments | Email this Article
News :: Miscellaneous
Opt-Out for Your Privacy Current rating: 0
22 Jun 2001
The Fourth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution spells out the right of citizens to be "secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches..." by their government.
When that amendment was ratified in 1791, no one imagined that it would be corporations, not governments, which would use their vast power to invade the privacy of citizens and, in effect, carry out unreasonable searches of the most intimate personal data.
Opt-Out for Your Privacy
By Ralph Nader
June 21, 2001


The Fourth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution spells out the right of citizens to be \"secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches...\" by their government.
When that amendment was ratified in 1791, no one imagined that it would be corporations, not governments, which would use their vast power to invade the privacy of citizens and, in effect, carry out unreasonable searches of the most intimate personal data.

But, that is exactly what is happening, particularly among newly-formed giant financial conglomerates which have access to a mass of data collected about millions of individuals by their far-flung insurance, bank, credit card and securities affiliates. Today, these giant corporations can assemble information to build a head to toe profile of most citizens and their buying and personal habits including what prescription and non-prescription health products they use as well as their investments, income, employment histories and entertainment preferences.

For this, consumers can thank the Clinton Administration and a bi-partisan group of Senators and Congressmen who lacked the courage to really defend citizens\' right to privacy when the so-called Financial Modernization legislation moved through the Congress in 1999. This law is the vehicle which allows banks, securities firms and insurance companies to merge as parts of financial conglomerates.

People like Democratic Representative Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Republican Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama fought hard to give citizens the right to control where and when their personal information was sold or used in any manner not authorized in writing in advance by you, the consumer-owner of the information. In short, under the Markey-Shelby approach consumers would have to \"opt-in\" in writing specifically authorizing the use of the information. Without this written affirmative permission from the consumer, the corporations could not sell, share or use the data for any purpose beyond that specifically agreed to by the consumer.

The industry, however, believed (correctly) that few consumers would give permission to have their information shared with unknown persons and corporations. They lobbied, successfully, for an opt-out system which would require consumers to send in a form indicating that they were opposed. The burden was on the consumer to \"opt out.\" If they forgot the form or failed to send it in or could not understand the legal jargon, the company would be free to distribute the personal information anywhere or to anyone it chose.

The industry lobbyists threatened to walk away from the legislation if the Shelby-Markey opt-in was adopted. The Clinton Administration and a bi-partisan majority in the Congress surrendered to the threats and left privacy protections to the financial industry\'s demand for a weak ineffectual opt-out approach.

The industry has sent out more than a billion of the opt-out notices as required by law. Most of them have been stuffed in the envelopes with a variety of miscellaneous promotional brochures accompanying monthly billing statements. Financial consultants who are following the issue estimate that only about five percent of the opt-out notices are being returned--the remainder tossed in the trash unnoticed and unread.

Further rendering the opt-out approach nearly useless is the fact that many of the notices are written clumsily with little attempt to explain the consumers\' rights in clear understandable language. Some appear to have been copied verbatim from technical federal regulations without translation into language that would help consumers take proper action to protect their privacy.

\"People don\'t read them, and they don\'t understand them,\" Karen Petrou, a leading financial consultant told a banking conference in Washington recently. That was exactly what the financial lobbyists were betting on when they pushed the opt-out language on a willing Congress.

Despite the shortcomings of the opt-out approach, consumer organizations and the media should do everything possible to publicize the existence of the opt-out possibilities and to encourage consumers to protect their privacy by sending in the opt-out forms immediately. But the only truly effective means of controlling the wholesale invasion of privacy is for Congress to flatly prohibit the distribution of personal information unless the consumer has specifically authorized it in writing in advance.

Your personal information belongs to you. You do not authorize its wholesale distribution just because you have provided information to a bank for a specific limited purpose such as a home mortgage. The bank should not have the right to sell or share that information for any other purpose unless you authorize it in writing and know specifically what information is being released and to whom.

Your personal information is your personal property. You should demand that the financial institutions you deal with so treat it. And you should demand to know how your Congressman voted when the Financial Modernization Act was adopted in November, 1999 with a weak industry-supported opt-out provision attached.

For Further Information on Privacy Contact:
U. S. PIRG, 218 D Street, SE
Washington, D. C. 20003
http://www.pirg.org/consumer/optout.htm
See also:
www.essential.org
Add a quick comment
Title
Your name Your email

Comment

Text Format
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.

Comments

Nader, Groups, Expose Privacy Deception
Current rating: 0
24 Jun 2001
New Opt-Out Website And Formal Petition To Regulators Announced

Groups Urge Stronger Privacy Laws To Replace Weak, Confusing Notices

The groups launched a website, "privacyrightsnow.com," to teach consumers how to "Say No" to banks selling their confidential records to telemarketers and also urged consumers to "fight back" by demanding stronger privacy laws based on consent, because "Notice is not enough." The groups also announced a planned petition to regulators to improve compliance with the law.
See also:
http://www.privacyrightsnow.com