WASHINGTON-Advocates hoping to get legislation passed this year to protect privacy in a digital age will have to get past the Senate Republican High-Tech Task Force as evidenced by remarks made at Thursday’s panel on Internet privacy.
“We ought to trust the free-enterprise system as much as possible. Whatever legislation, if it is going to go forward, really ought to be the least burdensome. One thing that everyone agrees is we do trust people. I do think it is important to trust people. Make sure they are informed, let them make as many of those decisions as possible with that information,” said Sen. George Allen (R-Va.), as he was ending the forum but he had already given away his position when he exclaimed, “Outstanding presentation!” at the end of Amazon.com’s presentation.
Amazon.com said it is protecting its consumers’ privacy not because they are legally required to but because it is good business. “There is no market failure here and no inherent need for legislation,” said Paul Misener, Amazon.com’s vice president for global public policy.
Misener did say that if legislation was necessary it must be done at the federal level because allowing the 50 different states to adopt 50 different laws will result in companies being compelled to comply with the “lowest common denominator.”
Additionally, individuals should not be allowed to sue for violating privacy laws, said Misener, calling for a restriction against “private rights of action.”
These two requests elicited a chuckle from James W. Harper, founder and principal of PolicyCounsel.com. Harper is against federal legislation but he also noted that each state has either written or common law that allows for people to sue when they feel their privacy has been violated.
“In every state there are either by law or common law rules that allow for private rights of action. I am a little skeptical of us moving away [from various state laws] to a national standard,” said Harper.
Finally, Misener said legislation must not discriminate against the Internet by having different privacy laws for Web-based companies than for “brick-and-mortar” companies.
This was music to Allen’s ears who questioned those on the panel favoring legislation as to why the Internet was different and therefore required different rules.
Jerry Berman, executive director of the Center for Democracy and Technology, turned the question around saying that broader legislation would be fine.
“If all that was stopping us was making the legislation more broad, let’s do it,” said Berman. “That would surely sink it,” replied Allen.
Privacy has become the Internet topic of the 107th Congress and policy makers-whether they be legislators, lobbyists or academics attached to think tanks-have been getting into the action. The day before the High-Tech Task Force Internet Privacy forum, the New American Foundation brought together companies and advocates to talk about privacy.
All of these forums seem to cut across the same themes. Advocates want legislation and companies believe protecting privacy is good business but not good politics.
In the end, as Allen said, it is unclear whether legislation will be passed-or even truly considered-but the stakes seem to be in the ground.
