Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Photo Source
As we start 2013 with privacy firmly ensconced in the national consciousness, important questions about how
privacy policy and enforcement should be framed- remain unanswered.
CONTACT US US: 888.878.7830 EU: +44 (0)203 078 6495 | www.truste.com TRUSTe Inc., 2017
Here are the questions we think will continue to loom large for consumers, industry and policymakers in 2013:
1. Should law enforcement be required to get a warrant before accessing my emails and texts?
The Petraeus-Broadwell episode demonstrated how easily the government can gain access to electronic
communications (texts, email) without an individuals knowledge or permission. Shortly after the story broke,
legislation requiring a warrant for access to an individuals electronic communications advanced
with bipartisan support in the House and Senate. The bill should have a good chance this year, but that all
depends on whether privacy will have visibility and bipartisan support in the 113th Congress.]
2. Should the phone company or Google Maps get my okay before tracking my location?
Senator Franken seems to think so. In 2012, his location privacy protection act, which advocates getting consent
for collecting or sharing location data and also bans mobile apps that secretly monitor location, advanced in
the Senate. It is expected that Senator Franken will re-introduce the bill in the 113th Congress and the prospects
for passage are good. Perhaps Congress will be forced to do something, given the visibility that location privacy
has right now.
CONTACT US US: 888.878.7830 EU: +44 (0)203 078 6495 | www.truste.com TRUSTe Inc., 2017
6. Should there be damages for privacy violations?
Questions of ownership invariably lead to the issue of whether there should be damages for privacy violations.
Until now, courts have been reluctant to find those types of damages, but two types of cases are worth noting
[thanks to @PrivacyWolf (Christopher Wolf) and the Future of Privacy Forum for alerting us to these
developments[SN3] ]. First, in Resnick v. AvMed, Inc., an 11th Circuit case involving Florida state law and stolen
laptops, the court found damages where there was actual financial injury to the plaintiffs from the defendants
actions. Second, two consumer class actions filed in federal courts in California (the iPhone app litigation) and
Washington, privacy claims have been allowed to proceed on the theory that plaintiffs:
paid more for their devices than they would have paid had they known their personal information would
be misused; and
incurred higher battery and data usage costs from the unwanted collection and sharing of their personal
information
CONTACT US US: 888.878.7830 EU: +44 (0)203 078 6495 | www.truste.com TRUSTe Inc., 2017
10. What is the best way to protect an individuals privacy while not impeding future innovation?
Should the way be different for online or offline context?
This last question is food for thought answering it could possibly also provide answers to the previous nine
questions. Like you, I look forward to seeing how the privacy dialogue unfolds and whether we will get answers
to some of these questions in 2013.
CONTACT US US: 888.878.7830 EU: +44 (0)203 078 6495 | www.truste.com TRUSTe Inc., 2017