![]() |
![]() |
October 2000
Screen Version
How Can We Ensure the Privacy of Internet Users?
Politically attractive but substantially complex and difficult,
Internet privacy is not likely to be legislated this year
By Harriet P. Pearson
hpearson@us.ibm.com
Recent developments pose a challenge to the conventional wisdom
that says that on the Internet, no one knows you're a dog. As
the Web has transformed into a mass medium, its use continues
to raise issues such as the following.
What is the best way that a visitor to a Web site should be apprised
of the site's information collection and use policies, so that
users can exercise their discretion? Close to 90 percent of the
top commercial Web sites post a privacy policy statement, compared
with 14 percent just two years ago. Is that an indicator that
the market is responding to Internet privacy concerns? Can such
notices be improved in their readability and usefulness, so that
they can truly inform the Internet user?
What kinds of accountability and enforcement exist for so-called
bad actors-those who promise to do one thing with one's data but
instead do another? Does the appearance in the United States of
seal programs such as BBBOnline and TRUSTe, combined with existing
legal authority to prosecute misleading or deceptive acts, adequately
address the enforcement issue? What do we do about the free riders-those
Web sites that do not adopt the best practice of posting a privacy
policy statement that addresses the fair information practice
principles of notice, choice, access, and security?
Further issues: How should the privacy of Internet users be protected
from the government, as opposed to the private sector? What kind
of legal protections exist or should exist to establish certain
baseline protections and expectations for Internet users? How
can a user's privacy expectations and preferences be met seamlessly
no matter the origin of a Web site? In other words, how can we
harmonize approaches to privacy in this global medium? Is federal
preemption of state attempts to regulate Web site data privacy
necessary to avoid the balkanization of the World Wide Web?
Still other issues: When an Internet user visits a Web site, what
kind of notice and choice should the user have about the presence
of Web ad serving? This practice occurs when companies help place
targeted advertising to a Web site by placing a cookie on the
user's machine and then identifying patterns of visits by that
uniquely identified machine across multiple sites.
Finally: When will we realize the promise of technology to assist
users in achieving their privacy preferences, whether they prefer
anonymity or some level of information sharing? Will the next
generation of the Internet be smarter about enabling individuals
to guard their own privacy? Is there a reason to distinguish between
online and offline privacy, since the data gathered from Internet
users ultimately resides in databases that may hold data derived
from multiple sources?
The Players
A new report from the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) profiles
how commercial Web sites in the U.S. addressed privacy in early
2000. The FTC's May 2000 report is its third annual report on
Internet privacy. The report relies on the survey of a random
sample of dot-coms (335 sites) receiving 39,000 or more unique
visitors each month-excluding children, adults, and business-to-business
sites-as well as a sample of 91 of the 100 busiest Web sites (called
the Most Popular Group) in January 2000. In a 3-2 vote, the FTC
recommended that private-sector efforts be supplemented by legislation
that would require all commercial Web sites to comply with standards
of notice, choice, access, and security. Under the FTC's proposal,
an agency-presumably the FTC-would issue regulations to implement
the general requirements. The FTC's rationale was that despite
progress in the private sector's addressing privacy issues on
the Internet, only government regulation could ensure that all
commercial Web sites adopt good information practices. This government
authority would be added to that already in place for-among other
things-children's online privacy, financial privacy, and medical
privacy.
The Commerce Department and the Clinton Administration overall
have not followed the FTC's lead in calling for legislation for
all aspects of Internet privacy. Instead, they have focused on
the near-term objectives of passing medical and financial privacy
regulations and have urged the private sector to accelerate its
work on general Internet privacy.
Many members of the U.S. Congress have demonstrated interest in
understanding and addressing Internet privacy. They include those
who support comprehensive regulation of privacy (Representative
Markey, D-MA), those who would impose opt-in standards for the
Internet and all information sharing (Senator Hollings, D-SC),
those who would outlaw cookies (Senator Torricelli, D-NJ), those
who approach privacy holistically and would address security issues
and government access issues (Senators Hatch, R-UT; Leahy, D-VT;
and Schumer, D-NY), and those who support the creation of a study
commission (Representatives Hutchinson, R-AR, and Moran, D-VA).
Many state legislatures this year have seen either legislation
on Internet privacy or comprehensive regulation of information
privacy, including those of California, Massachusetts, New York,
South Carolina, and Washington.
In the private sector, the Online Privacy Alliance (OPA) has set
guidelines for Web sites' collection and use of personally identifiable
information collected online. Composed of over 100 companies and
associations from multiple industries, the OPA serves as industry's
main voice on Internet privacy policy issues. Several independent
seal programs, such as BBBOnline and TRUSTe, continue to gain
momentum in the marketplace, with over 2,000 Web sites now carrying
some type of privacy trust mark.
Network-ad-serving companies such as Doubleclick and Engage have
formed a self-regulatory group, the Network Advertising Initiative,
which is developing-with the Commerce Department and the FTC-self-regulatory
guidelines for Web-ad-serving privacy.
The World Wide Web Consortium continues its work on the Platform
for Privacy Preferences specification, due to be finalized this
year. Technologically-oriented companies such as Zero Knowledge,
Privada, Novell, IBM, NCR, and Microsoft, have announced products
to help consumers and enterprises manage data privacy. Other companies-including
IBM, Microsoft, Disney, Procter & Gamble, and Novell-are spending
advertising dollars only with Web sites that make a commitment
to privacy disclosures.
Governments in Canada and the European Union (EU), as well as
other countries' governments that have broad privacy laws, are
also actively trying to understand how they can implement their
laws in the world of the Internet. The EU-U.S. Safe Harbor agreement
is one pragmatic approach to harmonizing varying approaches to
privacy.
The Forums
In the United States, at the federal level, the FTC and the Commerce
Department are the primary agencies charged with overseeing Internet
privacy. The two committees of jurisdiction in the Congress-Judiciary
and Commerce-are now starting to establish how they will approach
Internet privacy. A number of state legislatures are also active.
A fair number of countries, including Canada and all of the members
of the European Union, have already enacted broad privacy laws
that presumably affect the Internet, as has Hong Kong. Canada's
law, the most recently enacted, is the only law that was developed
with the Internet a reality; the rest predate the Net. Key questions
of jurisdiction for this global medium, as well as those of enforcement,
remain open. Other nations, such as Japan, support private-sector
programs and are deliberating what other legislation is needed,
if any. The issue is not yet joined in Latin America or in some
parts of Asia, including India.
The Prospects
Politically attractive, but substantively complex and difficult,
Internet privacy is an issue not likely be legislated in this
election year at either the federal or the state level. But it
will return in 2001, when the focus of the public policy process
will likely shift from the FTC to Congress. Look for a political
handshake between the EU and the U.S. on the Safe Harbor framework
for data flows between the two regions, which will be an important
example of how nations can harmonize differing approaches to Internet
policy issues. The appearance-finally-of a working specification
for P3P, the Platform for Privacy Preferences, will prompt a renewed
look at technology's potential to help resolve privacy policy
issues, but it will be a multiyear process.
What You Can Do
When you use the Internet, look for privacy policy statements.
If they are not present on a Web site or are not understandable,
contact the Web site and urge its compliance with baseline industry
practices. Refer the site to the Online Privacy Alliance Web site
http://www.privacyalliance.org for more information. Become educated
about the ways you can protect your privacy preferences by surveying
the Web sites listed below, and be a privacy-aware consumer.
If you are involved in an organization or company, urge it to
comply with the best practices suggested by the Online Privacy
Alliance or the Federal Trade Commission.
For More Information
PrivacyExchange (http://www.privacyexchange.org)-a free resource
of privacy laws, regulations and developments worldwide
Online Privacy Alliance (http://www.privacyalliance.org)-offering
guidelines for the collection and use of personal information
gathered on the Internet, as well as other resources for business
and individuals
TRUSTe (http://www.TRUSTe.org)
Better Business Bureaus (http://www.BBBOnline.org)
Center for Democracy and Technology (http://www.cdt.org)-an advocacy
group that contains resources for individuals
Electronic Privacy Information Center (http://www.epic.org)-an
advocacy group
Call For Action (http://www.callforaction.org)-a consumer assistance
site with basic consumer education material including the ABCs
of Online Privacy
Congressional Internet Caucus Advisory Committee (http://www.netcaucus.org)-an
advisory group to the Congressional Internet Caucus; see compilation
of information on online privacy
World Wide Web Consortium (http://www.w3.org/P3P)-containing information
on the Platform for Privacy Preferences (P3P)
Federal Trade Commission: Kidz Privacy
(http://www.ftc.gov/kidsprivacy)-containing information on children's
privacy
Federal Trade Commission (http://www.ftc.gov)-containing the FTC
report on online privacy, as well as the report of its Advisory
Committee on Online Access and Security
International Trade Administration at the U.S. Department of Commerce
(http://www.ita.doc.gov)-containing documents on the European
Union's Safe Harbor framework
About the Authors
Harriet Pearson directs IBM's involvement in several areas of
public policy, including privacy, health care, consumer protection,
retirement income, labor, and other social policy issues raised
by the shift to a networked world. Based in Washington, D.C.,
Pearson is active with a number of associations and coalitions.
Within IBM, she cochairs the company's Privacy Council, a corporation-wide
team formed to further IBM's commitment to privacy. Pearson also
chairs the Privacy Committee of the Information Technology Industry
Council and has a leadership role in the Online Privacy Alliance.
Join the Internet Society today: http://www.isoc.org/welcome/