* Just recently, Google transferred information on one of its Chinese users, the result was imprisonment by the Chinese authorities. As the wave of criticism that accompanied this finding - that Google wasn't respecting user privacy - was dying down, here comes Yahoo cofounder, Jerry Yang.
* In an article on the online edition of the Nikkei Daily of September 10, although Yahoo insists that "we don't know how the information is used, or how it was passed on" and "this was not what I was hoping for", it agrees that it was a case based on "leaking of national security information". The result was the indictment of the individual.
* Of course a company has to face up to compliance, and NAVIBLOG's privacy statement also mentions that "if we are required by law to disclose personal user-related information[...], we may decide to disclose such information on a case-to-case basis". But the whole point is "we may decide". Although an internet service provider has a social responsibility, it also has a responsibility towards the protection of its users. Different in nature to other products, the provision of information services over the Internet means a business with the responsibility for the safekeep of that information: hence passing any information to a third party is an extremely sensitive issue.
* With the repetitive leaking of information on Japan's Basic Residential Registers Network System or the provision of personal information to national authorities, the problem we are facing is slightly different to the leaking of information say by Citibank or Visa that occurred recently. In one case, the rules for information provision is loose, leading to an easy access to your information by 3rd parties. The other is a case of holes in the security system, where information leaked due to mistakes in the process of data management. One is a top management issue, the other a software management issue.
* In our advanced information societies, we have a movement towards laws such as Japan's Personal Information Protection Law . which create confidence in the appropriate use of individual information by a company. At the same time, another movement in laws such as the US Patriot Act based on loosely defined concepts such as "war on terrorism", allow national authorities to ignore these protection laws. Strict on the consumer society cycle (user/company), easy on the authorities. As citizens, don't we see a contradiction in terms here?
No comments:
Post a Comment