|
|
|
|
|
by allemagne
3688 days ago
|
|
Whether the government already has data is immaterial when the question is whether they "should" have it from a moral or philosophical standpoint, which is the context I'm assuming we're working within. The legality of their having it certainly has questionable constitutionality. In Sorrell vs IMS Health, the issue does not seem to be whether government and private companies could use the same data to market pharmaceuticals, but whether pharmacies could sell prescription data without doctors' consent. "Fairness" to companies using the same data as government appears to have nothing to do with it. You missed a period at the end of your link, so I added it in mine below. If we ignore that and assume your interpretation is correct, your conclusion that private individuals and organizations are privy to the exact same personal information that all government organizations may have is definitely not the conclusion that outcome would point towards and is still, indeed, a bizarre belief. As to your final argument, who is talking about suing companies? If you're responding directly to something I said, the logic to connect it to your response is unclear at best. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorrell_v._IMS_Health_Inc. |
|