A Fight Over the Right to Repair Cars Takes a Wild Turn; Wired, June 17, 2023

 AARIAN MARSHALL, Wired; A Fight Over the Right to Repair Cars Takes a Wild Turn

"Amid competing letters, statements, and legal paperwork there’s a fundamental question, one that Massachusetts tried to find the answer to: Who owns the reams of data created by today’s increasingly software- and computer-chip-enabled vehicles?"

Virginia governor signs nation’s second state consumer privacy bill; The Washington Post, March 2, 2021

Cat Zakrzewski The Washington Post ; Virginia governor signs nation’s second state consumer privacy bill

"Gov. Ralph Northam signed data privacy legislation into law on Tuesday, making Virginia the second state in the nation to adopt its own data protection rules.

The law, known as the Consumer Data Protection Act, had broad support from the tech industry, including Amazon, which is building an Arlington, Va., headquarters. The legislation will allow residents of the commonwealth to opt out of having their data collected and sold, similar to a California law that went into effect last year. Under the new law, Virginia residents can also see what data companies have collected about them, and correct or delete it. (Amazon founder and chief executive Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post.)

The Virginia law is widely viewed as more industry friendly than the California provision, however, and privacy advocates have called for Virginia to adopt some of California’s provisions that make it easier for people to opt out of data collection from multiple companies. The Virginia law also does not allow individuals to bring lawsuits against tech companies for violations and will be enforced by the state’s attorney general, not a separate enforcement agency."

Regulators Fine Google $170 Million for Violating Children’s Privacy on YouTube; The New York Times, September 4, 2019

Natasha Singer and Kate Conger, The New York Times;

Regulators Fine Google $170 Million for Violating Children’s Privacy on YouTube

 

"Google on Wednesday agreed to pay a record $170 million fine and to make changes to protect children’s privacy on YouTube, as regulators said the video site had knowingly and illegally harvested personal information from youngsters and used that data to profit by targeting them with ads.

The measures were part of a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission and New York’s attorney general. They said YouTube had violated a federal children’s privacy law known as the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, or COPPA."

Why we can’t leave Grindr under Chinese control; The Washington Post, April 9, 2019

Isaac Stone Fish, The Washington Post; Why we can’t leave Grindr under Chinese control

"Because a Chinese company now oversees Grindr’s data, photographs and messages, that means the [Chinese Communist] Party can, if it chooses to do so, access all of that information, regardless of where it’s stored. And that data includes compromising photos and messages from some of America’s most powerful men — some openly gay, and some closeted.

Couple this with China’s progress in developing big data and facial recognition software, industries more advanced there than in the United States, and there are some concerning national security implications of a Chinese-owned Grindr. In other words, Beijing could now exploit compromising photos of millions of Americans. Think what a creative team of Chinese security forces could do with its access to Grindr’s data."

A Tough Task for Facebook: European-Type Privacy for All; The New York Times, April 8, 2018

Natasha Singer, The New York Times; A Tough Task for Facebook: European-Type Privacy for All

"Next month, a comprehensive new data protection law goes into effect in the European Union, placing greater requirements on how companies like Facebook and Google handle users’ personal information. It also strengthens individuals’ rights to control the collection and use of their data.

Last week, Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s chief executive, said his company would offer its users all over the world the same privacy controls required under the European law.

What would that look like for Facebook users? That is still a work in progress. A Facebook spokeswoman said the company would provide more details about its plans in the coming weeks.In the meantime, here are some of the general requirements and rights under the new European law.

Although some of the practical steps that companies must take are still being worked out, several European privacy and consumer advocates, who had pushed for the new law, offered their thoughts on what Facebook might need to do to extend the protections to its users worldwide."

Open Access: On Learning I Won’t Die Of My Grandmother’s Disease; The Georgetown Voice, April 7, 2018

Rebecca Zaritsky, The Georgetown Voice; Open Access: On Learning I Won’t Die Of My Grandmother’s Disease

[Kip Currier: This past week's Information Ethics course module explored and reflected on the pluses and minuses of DNA testing. This article is a thought-provoking first-person account of one person's 23andMe DNA test results.

The author raises some positive aspects of genetic testing, as well as some potential downsides. She offers a "go-between" strategy for mitigating those possible impacts, concluding that "It’s not fair to the patients to expose them to information without an explanation."

Lots of practical challenges and legal and ethical questions are raised by the writer's suggested remedy though, regarding who, when, and how someone would make the grey decisions about what constitutes "serious medical information that affects the individual’s life" and what constitutes "non-medical or “trivia” information". Who would bear responsibility for making these "tough calls"? Who or what entities would be charged with oversight and enforcement?

No easy answers. But the author raises important questions for  law- and policymakers, ethicists, and consumers about the implications of this increasingly touted technology and information tool.]

"The results were, generally speaking, good news. A gene for hypertension doesn’t scare me, and if I die of heart disease, at least I’ll still die as me. I was excited, intrigued, and overall relaxed by what I found. In hindsight, I’m only sorry I waited so long.

Still, what if that hadn’t been my experience? What if I did have copies of APOE4, or a mutation in a familial Alzheimer’s gene, or another disorder that nothing could be done about? I could have found out some serious, life-changing information for only $10 and a couple of clicks. Would I have been able to deal with that? I can’t say for certain. Not everyone who does these tests will have the same outcome as I will, and some will undoubtedly find information they weren’t prepared for and didn’t want. If I found out I had a mutation in BRCA, a gene conferring a high-risk for breast cancer, would I have spent my whole life worrying?

More commonly, there’s the potential for misinterpretation."

Everything you need to know about a new EU data law that could shake up big US tech; CNBC, March 30, 2018

Arjun Kharpal, CNBC; Everything you need to know about a new EU data law that could shake up big US tech

"You may have heard of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). But most likely you haven't because it sounds boring, but it's really important and CNBC has a guide to help you understand it.

It's a piece of European Union (EU) legislation that could have a far-reaching impact on some of the biggest technology firms in the world including Facebook and Google.

So here's your guide to the GDPR."

EU seeks to outlaw 'backdoors' in new data privacy proposals; Guardian, June 19, 2017

Samuel Gibbs, Guardian; EU seeks to outlaw 'backdoors' in new data privacy proposals

"The ePrivacy directive change proposals seek to bring the 2002 law in line with the newer GDPR and attempt to keep pace with technological development. They also cover the tracking of users for advertising, the collection of metadata and behavioural data, an the explicit consent required to do so.

The amendments will have to journey through a multi-stage process including approval by the European parliament and European council before becoming law, but they were welcomed by privacy and security experts."

The Supreme Court Phone Location Case Will Decide the Future of Privacy; Mother Board, June 16, 2017

Stephen Vladeck, MotherBoard; The Supreme Court Phone Location Case Will Decide the Future of Privacy

"Later this year, the Supreme Court will decide if police can track a person’s cell phone location without a warrant. It's the most important privacy case in a generation.

For all of the attention paid to former FBI Director Jim Comey's highly anticipated testimony before the Senate intelligence committee last Thursday, the most important constitutional law development from last week took place across the street (and three days earlier), when the Supreme Court agreed to hear argument in Carpenter v. United States later this year—though exactly when, we're not sure.

Carpenter raises a specific question about whether Americans have an expectation of privacy in historical "cell-site location information" ("CSLI")."

Can you teach ethics to algorithms?; CIO, May 15, 2017

James Maclennan, CIO; 

Can you teach ethics to algorithms?

"The challenges of privacy

Addressing bias is a challenge, but most people understand that discrimination and bias are bad. What happens when we get into trickier ethical questions such as privacy?

Just look at Facebook and Google, two companies that have mountains of information on you. A recent report uncovered that Facebook “can figure out when people as young as 14 feel ‘defeated,’ ‘overwhelmed’ and ‘a failure.’” This information is gathered by a Facebook analysis system, and it is really easy how such information could be abused.

The fact that the information uncovered by such an algorithm could be so easily abused does not make the algorithm morally wrong. Facebook decided to create the algorithm without considering the ethical implications of manipulating depressed teenagers to buy more stuff, and thus the responsibility falls on Facebook and not the algorithm. 

Facebook at minimum needs to encourage its own technological staff to think about the ethical consequences of any new algorithm they construct. If Facebook and other technological companies fail to consider protecting user privacy by constructing algorithms, then the government may have to step in to ensure the peoples’ rights are protected."

Speaker's Corner: Privacy needs better protection; Law Times, May 15, 2017

Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Law Times; 

Speaker's Corner: Privacy needs better protection

"There are also concerns that our current model of informed consent needs updating. The majority of Canadians admit to not reading privacy policies for mobile apps, and a recent privacy sweep — in which 25 privacy enforcement authorities participated — found that privacy communications of Internet-connected devices are generally poor and fail to inform users about exactly what personal information is being collected and how it will be used. It is difficult to reconcile these facts with the goal of meaningful consent.

This is especially important as more devices collect more information about our lives. From smart meters that track our energy consumption to fridges that track what we eat, Cisco Systems estimates there will be 50 billion connected devices by 2020. As a consumer, I want convenience and will trade some of my privacy. As a citizen and as a lawyer, I want laws that substantively protect my privacy. 

In general terms, we should mandate privacy by design. Governments and third parties ought to anonymize our personal information, and our government should follow Australia’s example and make it an offence to re-identify published government data sets. We should also look beyond the law to protect our data. 

Take Estonia. On the one hand, it has embraced big data through maintaining a national register with a single unique identifier for all citizens and residents. Customer service is improved and information is exchanged more easily. On the other hand, the same system ensures that citizens can correct or remove data easily and can see which officials have viewed their data. 

In summary, we need to embrace new laws and new technology. We need not sacrifice our privacy."

Consumers Less Confident About Healthcare, Data Privacy, and Car Safety, New Survey Finds; Consumer Reports, May 11, 2017

Consumer Reports; Consumers Less Confident About Healthcare, Data Privacy, and Car Safety, New Survey Finds

"Distrust About Data Privacy

There was even wider agreement from consumers across political party lines about their concern over digital privacy. An overwhelming majority—92 percent of Americans—say internet companies and websites should be required to get their permission before selling or sharing their data with other companies. And the same percentage believe internet companies and websites should be required to provide consumers with a complete list of the data they’ve collected about them, if asked.

A full-time worker from the western part of the country made clear the opposing forces at stake online: “Do we want to make money, or look out for the privacy of people?” said the man, 20, who identified himself as independent.

The survey was conducted a few days after Congress passed a resolution, which Trump signed, undoing the FCC’s new broadband privacy rules that would have limited the ability of internet service providers to profit from using consumers’ personal information."

What you’re really agreeing to when you accept your smart TV’s privacy policy; Washington Post, April 17, 2017

Hayley Tsukayama, Washington Post; What you’re really agreeing to when you accept your smart TV’s privacy policy

"Let's be honest here — most of us don’t read the privacy policies for smart televisions. And even if we try to, it’s often difficult to read them, particularly on a television screen. Some televisions even display the massive policies five lines at a time. Reaction to recent controversies involving Vizio and Samsung televisions, for example, have highlighted that while people understand that their televisions have microphones, cameras and tracking software, they don't fully understand how much of this information they've actually agreed to share with companies.

So we asked a few legal experts who specialize in privacy — Christopher Dore of the Chicago-based law firm Edelson, Danielle Citron of the University of Maryland, William McGeveran of the University of Minnesota and Bradley Shear of Maryland-based Shear Law — to explain what we're really getting into when we hit the “I agree” button."

Vibrator Maker To Pay Millions Over Claims It Secretly Tracked Use; NPR, March 14, 2017

Camila Domonoske, NPR; 

Vibrator Maker To Pay Millions Over Claims It Secretly Tracked Use

"The makers of the We-Vibe, a line of vibrators that can be paired with an app for remote-controlled use, have reached a $3.75 million class action settlement with users following allegations that the company was collecting data on when and how the sex toy was used...

The lawyers for the anonymous plaintiffs contended that the app, "incredibly," collected users' email addresses, allowing the company "to link the usage information to specific customer accounts."...

Standard Innovation also agreed to stop collecting users' email addresses and to update its privacy notice to be clearer about how data is collected."

Eye in the sky: the billionaires funding a surveillance project above Baltimore; Guardian, 10/15/16

Tom Dart, Guardian; Eye in the sky: the billionaires funding a surveillance project above Baltimore:

"From January to August this year, Baltimore police said at a news conference last week, the plane flew over the city for 314 hours, taking more than a million images. The police added that the plane would operate as an anti-terrorism measure during Fleet Week, which started on Monday, and the marathon.

This spurt of transparency was more than a little tardy. Until Bloomberg Businessweek ran a story in August, virtually no one knew about the surveillance programme, not even the mayor. Yet the technology raises obvious civil liberties questions, as does the way the plan was funded: by unaccountable private citizens in Houston whose wealth silently enabled a blanket tracking tool in a large city with notoriously strained relations between police and residents."

Dilbert, 7/2/16

Scott Adams; Dilbert:

Mom Drone

Ced Kurtz’s Techman Texts: Computer surveillance is a trade-off; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 4/7/15

Ced Kurtz, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; Ced Kurtz’s Techman Texts: Computer surveillance is a trade-off:

"Bruce Schneier is a world-renowned cryptographer, computer security and privacy specialist, and author of numerous books on security. So when he speaks, TechMan tends to listen.

In his latest book, “Data and Goliath: The Hidden Battles to Collect Your Data and Control Your World,” his point is well worth taking note of: Surveillance and data collections are a trade-off between individual value and group value. You give Google personal information in return for free search, free email, free maps and all the other free things Google provides...

Although hackers tend to get the headlines for the personal data they steal, a far bigger issue is the personal data you give away freely every day in return for convenience.

Mr. Schneier points out that all those data are saved in massive databases that can be data-mined by businesses, government and law enforcement and sold to other agencies. And although the point is always made that data collected are not tied to your identity, Mr. Schneier shows that, with enough data about you, identifying you is not difficult."