|
|
|
|
|
|
by rubbingalcohol
4010 days ago
|
|
|
Section 4(d)(2) requires removal of information that a company "knows at the time of sharing" to be private personal information. That's complete weak sauce. There is tons of leeway here for the government to demand threat indicators that could "accidentally" vacuum up private info without anyone "knowing" about it. And the bill hasn't even gone through committee. If the past is any indication, the GOP will try to strike it completely. Anyway, I would appreciate if you could address the other point I raised because I'm very curious to hear your philosophical thoughts on this subject. |
|
|
On the Constitutional issue:
> It _is_ an end-run around the Constitution if the data a company provides belongs to an individual and is disclosed without a proper warrant, unless you agree with the statement that "people have no right to privacy in any data held by third party service providers."
People have multiple rights to privacy related to such data. Some come from state law. Some come from federal agencies. Some come from federal legislation. Some come from the Constitution.
The ones from the Constitution protect against government compelling release of the data. They don't protect against the providers deciding on their own to disclose the information to the government (or to the public, or to private parties). If, for instance, PG&E decided to publish a list of its customers along with contact information and energy use records, it would not be violating a Constitutional right to privacy. If the government demanded that PG&E make and turn over such a list, then we've got a Constitutional issue to talk about.
In that hypothetical, PG&E would be violating some of those other rights to privacy that come from state legislation, federal legislation, and agency rules, and would run into a ton of trouble.