White House Releases Draft 'Privacy' Bill That's Not Very Good

from the let's-try-again,-shall-we dept

It’s been talked about for a while, but on Friday, the White House released a draft of what it’s calling a “Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights.” Conceptually, that sounds like a decent idea, but in practice? Not so much. Yes, it’s just a draft, but it’s got a lot of vague hand-waving, and basically no one seems all that thrilled about it, either from the privacy advocate side or the tech company side. Also, it doesn’t even address the biggest privacy concern of all: government surveillance and snooping.

Privacy is, of course, one of those things that can be rather tricky to regulate, for a variety of reasons. Many attempts turn out badly, and don’t really do much to actually protect privacy — while sometimes blocking legitimate and useful innovations. While we’re big supporters of protecting one’s privacy we’re at least somewhat concerned about legislation that appears to be pretty sloppy, and not all that well defined or thought out. This feels like a “we needed to do something, so here’s something” kind of draft bill, rather than a “here’s a legitimate problem, and here’s how to fix it.” It feels like a lost opportunity.

Filed Under: , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “White House Releases Draft 'Privacy' Bill That's Not Very Good”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Barbara Duck (user link) says:

Agree not very good - can't use words "data sellers" yet

Covered entity, still the catch here and why I started a campaign to index/license data sellers. They can’t self regulate as look what we have now. Companies like e-scoring descibe themselves differently so they don’t come under federal laws.

I have had mathematicians and quants alike agree, even the Anonymous guys that you need an index on who the players are and without a license, well one can easily say “I’m not a covered entity” Here’s my campaign that I informally started 3 years ago.


Now let’s talk “repackaging” consumer data..hmmm..nothing here to distinguish a legal chunk of data or stolen data and this is huge. Look at the Anthem case, one could sit there and create “data for sale” with tons of simple SQL statements and put the stolen data up for sale on sites like this one who are open for posting and selling data, and they don’t do anything except collect a fee for the matching of the buyer and seller.


So now you find flawed data out there about yourself being sold, anyway to track and find the originator with repackaging taking place? No way, burnt myself on that one trying to find the originators of flawed data sold about me.

If sellers and buyers were licensed on legal sales, then we would have a tracking system where consumers could contact and correct flawed data, which we have to do by the way on our own dime too. We license things in this country with a lot less risk, like fishing licenses for an example. Not licensing data sellers is like expecting stock brokers to self govern…not going to happen with the data selling business at $180 billion a year in the US and growing.

Cal (profile) says:

Re: Re: Critical question

Actually, that is not quite correct. They do it because we do not hold them accountable as the US Constitution requires of us.

The US Constitution only gave the general government the powers that were specifically enumerated (listed) was the ONLY understanding reached by the states, and held until modern (progressive) unlawful reinterpretations of the Constitution took hold.

Our founders had the ingenious wherewithal to draft a Constitutional model that is based the powers for the general (federal) government that are explicitly spelled out, chiefly in Article I, Section 8 as LAW, the supreme law of this land.

justme says:


I haven’t read the draft, but the title alone is offensive!

The general down grading of American citizen’s to mere consumer’s allows politicians to rationalize policies that run counter to the wishes of the majority of those citizens, for our own good!

I am an American citizen and until more people demand that they be respected as such, we will continue to be sold out by those who view us as mindless consumers!

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...