From: tzeruch@ceddec.com
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 03:04:10 +0800
To: Declan McCullagh <declan@pathfinder.com>
Subject: Re: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970613120008.13113J-100000@cp.pathfinder.com>
Message-ID: <97Jun13.142726edt.32257@brickwall.ceddec.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote:

> Get a clue. I did:
> 
>         Of course there's an essential right to privacy from the
>    government. (Beware government databases: Nazis used census data in
>    Germany and Holland to track down and eliminate undesirables.)

Today the Nazi's would simply pay Experian (was TRW) for their databases. 
I think the IRS already does. 

Private databases collect a lot of data that I am not asked about, or from
government, or that I am required to turn over (e.g. Government requires a
taxpayer ID number to open a bank account, so I can't shop for a bank that
offers privacy as an option, but they will then turn around and give the
information to the databasers).  Since the Government is the origin of the
Social Security Number, and requires its use in many instances, there
should be a law that I should be able to remove any government-required
information removed from any non-governmental-required database.  This may
restrict my access to things like credit (they have the right to say, no
SSN, no credit, which is where I differ with most privacy advocates), but
I should have that choice.

Right now, the lines are too fuzzy.  I think government and private
databases should be disjoint.  Otherwise "private databases" are just a
way for government to evade any restriction on collection or use.

And do they have the right to hold stale or inaccurate data?  And can they
use fraudulent means of obtaining it, or archive data obtained by such
means?