# White House backs online 'privacy bill of rights' (Update)



## lotuseclat79 (Sep 12, 2003)

White House backs online 'privacy bill of rights' (Update).



> *The White House urged Congress on Wednesday to approve a "consumer privacy bill of rights" to govern the collection and use of personal data on the Internet.*


-- Tom


----------



## Rob Pearson (Jul 10, 2003)

Sure internet privacy is a concern, but do we really want the government jumping in when it comes to talking about "privacy" .. They're the ones looking to add wire taps to their arsenal in another recent news post on the forms ...

Quick quote from the article linked in the above post...

[WEBQUOTE="Nate Anderson's ArsTechnica Story"]Streaming: The government wants to make sure that, as online piracy moves increasingly to streaming, the law keeps up with the activity. Currently, "reproducing" and "distributing" copyrighted works are felony charges, and they cover peer-to-peer file-sharing. But streaming seems more like a "public performance"and holding a public performance without a proper license is not a felony.

As Espinel's paper notes, "questions have arisen" about this distinction, and those questions "have impaired the criminal enforcement of copyright laws." She wants Congress to "clarify that infringement by streaming, or by means of other similar new technology, is a felony in appropriate circumstances."

Wiretaps: The FBI and other federal agencies can tap phones and Internet connections for a whole host of serious crimes, but criminal copyright and trademark cases are not among them. Espinel wants to change this situation.[/WEBQUOTE]


----------



## hewee (Oct 26, 2001)

Good point Rob Pearson.
You can bet someplace in the find print there is a *May* used and that can be the right to do what ever. A very misused word lawyers love to do something else later on once they have there foot in the door.


----------

