by Mike Masnick
Thu, Dec 27th 2007 4:20am
The "Do Not Call" list has been something of a success over the past five years, but the various attempts at similar "do not X" lists always seem a bit ridiculous. The latest, coming from the state of Connecticut, would institute an impossible to enforce and most likely unconstitutional universal opt-out list for your info online. The idea is that there are so many directory sites/people search engines/list sites online, many of which have your name, address and potentially other information such as where you work. The law proposed by Connecticut's governor would allow you to "opt-out" and require all of these sites to take your info offline. Of course, as the article notes, much of that info is already public info and there's nothing illegal about compiling a list of public information. Where would the line be drawn? If your info shows up in a Google search, is Google suddenly liable? It's also unclear how you could possibly enforce a requirement that someone's name and address never get posted online. If anything, it sounds like more grandstanding legislation designed to make a politician look good rather than deal with the very real issues at hand concerning privacy.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Sixth Circuit Appeals Court Prepares To Consider The Privacy Implications Of Mugshots
- Did You Hear About How ISIS Has A Sophisticated Training Manual For Encryption? Yeah, It Was Actually A Pamphlet For Journalists And Activists
- Telegraph Publishes The Dumbest Article On Encryption You'll Ever Read... Written By David Cameron's Former Speechwriter
- Is There Any Evidence In The World That Would Convince Intelligence Community That More Surveillance Isn't The Answer?
- France Already Expanded Surveillance Twice In The Past Year -- Perhaps Expanding It Again Is Not The Answer?