roundtable: FTC privacy report disputed

roundtable: FTC privacy report disputed

FTC privacy report disputed

crawford@cs.ucdavis.edu
Wed, 20 Aug 1997 16:35:20 -0700 

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 16:35:20 -0700
From: crawford@cs.ucdavis.edu
Message-Id: <9708202335.AA29771@ivy.cs.ucdavis.edu>
To: civlib@cpsr.org, roundtable@cni.org
Subject: FTC privacy report disputed


It sounds like the FTC outrageously mischaracterized the input at its
public workshop.  Not surprising for a govt agency that's been captured
by those interests it supposedly regulates.

-rick    crawford@cs.ucdavis.edu
------

http://www.epic.org/privacy/databases/ftc_letter_0797.html



August 1, 1997

The Honorable John McCain
Chairman
Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation
United States Senate
SD-508 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-6125

Dear Mr. Chairman,

      We are writing regarding the letter that was sent to you on 
July 31 1997 by the Federal Trade Commission concerning the Public
Workshop on Consumer Privacy held on June 10-13, 1997. It is our view
that the FTC preliminary assessment does not accurately reflect the
substance of the hearings or the views of the consumer organizations
that participated. We are both disappointed and troubled by the FTC
report.

      First, the Commission badly misrepresented the views of the
American public when it stated in its letter to you that "consumer
survey research presented at the Workshop indicates [that] they are
looking for greater protection, preferably from voluntary efforts
by industry, but if necessary from government." The survey research
presented at the Workshop consistently clearly showed the opposite:
consumers and Internet users favor legislation today to protect personal
privacy. Indeed, the survey conducted by Prof. Alan Westin for American
Laws and Business found that "58% of computer users wanted government to
pass laws now on how personal information can be collected and used on
the Net." (emphasis added). Professor Westin also found that "Only 24%
say government should limit its role to recommending standards." The 7th
GVU WWW survey, the most comprehensive survey of Internet users ever
conducted, also presented at the FTC hearings "found that most people
feel that the Internet needs new laws to protect privacy."

      Instead of reporting the clear results of the survey research
presented and the views expressed by groups representing consumers at
the FTC hearing, the FTC chose instead to present the views of industry
lobbyists as if they were the views of American consumers. Such a
misrepresentation could be considered "fraudulent and deceptive," to
borrow a phrase that should be well known to the FTC.

      Second, the FTC letter goes to great length to applaud the
efforts of a handful of companies to develop privacy policies. But
nowhere in the letter is there any specific discussion of the specific
threats to personal privacy by the on-line industry. Plenty of evidence
was presented that the on-line industry has failed to develop adequate
privacy safeguards for customers, and that even where standards are
established they are often ignored. People have lost jobs. People have
been stalked. Incorrect information is routinely disclosed. Personal
information is sold to strangers but is unavailable to the person to
whom it refers.  None of this is reflected in the letter presented to
you.

      Third, the FTC endorses a series of vague proposals made by
industry groups without any discussion of the adequacy, desirability,
or consumer acceptance of these approaches. Virtually every industry
recommendation put forward at the FTC workshop requires placing new
burdens on consumers to protect their privacy. Many were roundly
criticized by consumer groups. None of these problems were discussed in
the letter to you.

      Fourth, on the matter of children's privacy, where there is
virtually unanimous support for legal safeguards, the FTC said instead
that "there was strong support at the Workshop for the development of
technological tools to protect children's privacy." In fact, according
to the poll conducted by Prof. Westin, "96% of parents say that
companies collecting information from children should be held legally
liable for violations of their stated policies." (emphasis added).
The FTC itself set out in the KidsCom decision possible guidelines for
children's privacy. It clearly could have proposed in the letter to you
that Congress consider a similar approach. Instead, it has effectively
placed the burden for protecting childrens privacy back on parents
instead of on the companies that are collecting and selling personal
information about kids.

      The FTC's assessment of consumer privacy issues, as expressed to
you in the letter of July 31, contrasts sharply with the reality of the
on-line world.  Indeed, in between the FTC workshop and the letter sent
to you, America On-line was widely cited for its failure to uphold basic
privacy assurances provided in its own Terms of Service agreement with
customers. That story, which was widely reported in newspapers across
the country, makes clear that there is growing public concern about the
inadequacy of current privacy safeguards.

      We believe that there is a significant role for government in
the protection of on-line privacy and we believe that a great many
Americans, as users of on-line services sending personal and
confidential information, share this view.

      We think the report of the FTC sent on July 31 fails to
adequately reflect both the hearing record and the concerns of the
American public.


      Sincerely yours,

       	Jeff Chester
      	Center for Media Education
      	www.cme.org

      	Beth Givens
      	Privacy Rights Clearinghouse
      	www.privacyrights.org

      	Evan Hendricks
      	Privacy Times
      	www.privacytimes.com

      	Lori Fena
      	Electronic Frontier Foundation
      	www.eff.org

      	Jeane Anne Fox
      	Consumer Federation of America

      	Jon Lebkowsky
      	EFF-Austin
      	www.eff-austin.org

      	Jamie Love
      	Consumer Project on Technology
      	www.cptech.org

      	Marc Rotenberg
      	Electronic Privacy Information Center
      	www.epic.org

      	Robert Ellis Smith
      	Privacy Journal


cc: Chairman Robert Pitofsky

[CNI Home Page]