----------------------------------------------------------------------
Published by: Mike Banks Valentine
www.privacynotes.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
July 11, 2002 Issue # 017
----------------------------------------------------------------------
.....IN THIS DIGEST.....
// -- MODERATOR COMMENT -- //
"ClickZ Spam Challenge" ~ Mike Banks Valentine
// -- NEW DISCUSSION -- //
"Digital ID & Public Identity?" ~ Internetweek Poll ~ Moderator
Comment
// -- CONTINUING DISCUSSION -- //
"Privacy Fee?" ~ Moderator Comment ~ Eric
"Privacy Policy Company?" ~ Moderator Comment ~ David
"Privacy Advocacy" ~ Eric Norlin ~ Moderator Comment
// -- PRIVACY NEWS -- //
"The Latest in Privacy Issues"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
// -- MODERATOR COMMENT -- //
The following is a copy of a letter I sent this week to Rebecca
Lieb, executive editor of internet.com's eCommerce/marketing channel.
This was in response to her article titled, "Spam: Call to (What?)
Industry Action". At the end of that piece, she offers a tantalizing
tidbit when she suggests,
"If you, ClickZ's readers, can come up with an actionable plan
for fighting spam collectively, as an industry, ClickZ promises
to commit energy and resources to the project. We need consensus,
plans, and strategy. Tell us what you think can be done. We'll
keep you posted."
I'd like to encourage Privacynotes readers to contribute your best
ideas on curbing Spam, before it destroys the killer ap of the
web, email. Here are my comments to Ms. Lieb:
<START>
Rebecca,
The Truste initiatives bear looking at, but I expect only the
same vague and watered down guidelines followed by marketers due
to overwhelming self-interest and competitive concerns.
>> TRUSTe, the nonprofit organization widely known for
its leading privacy certification and >> seal program, and
ePrivacy Group, a respected privacy consulting, training and >>
technology company, have joined forces to launch a groundbreaking
email certification and >> seal program to bring consumer
trust to commercial email. Under the banner ÒTrusted >>
Sender,Ó this new program includes beta testers Microsoft, DoubleClick
and Topica. >> Announced in January.
http://www.truste.org/about/TrustedSenderReleaseFINAL.html
I am certain that no marketing or advertising company online
will ever reduce their apparent effectiveness by offering lower
numbers than competitors offer. Although there are a few struggling
to create the appearance that they oppose data aggregation and
appending practices, I don't believe them for a second. It would
kill their business in the current market climate.
There is the non-option of reverse filtering which blocks all
but approved senders and/or subject lines.
http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/18180.html
I'd love to be involved and/or informed of any initiatives that
come from your articles.
I trust you are aware of the piece by Jeanne Jennings this week
at http://www.clickz.com/em_mkt/opt/article.php/1367711
As a small business I use a filtering service for my own account
which cleans my inbox of about 4,000 spam messages a month. I'm
a list host for multiple email lists with a combined total of
about 10,000 members, small by most standards, yet those lists
generate a virus induced (from subscribers) and malicious load
of spam I can't tolerate or manage without a tool like this.
The New York Times did a short piece this week on Filtering
Services, including a quick mention of http://spamfilter.website101.com
! (Now I've made it to TWO of the nations biggest print publications!)
As a marketer, I am fiercely opposed to spam, insist on double
opt in for my own lists and have spoken publicly in articles and
my own forums about being trapped between abusers and accusers.
http://WebSite101.com/SpamFilter/spamcop_vigilanties.html
As you can clearly see by my signature line below, I am also
a privacy advocate. That involves keeping my own identity and
that of others from spammers, criminals, scamsters and Big Brother.
Clearly, a solution is long overdue and it sure won't come from
most marketers and advertisers under watered down AIM guidelines
and DMA posturing.
Please let me know of any action resulting from discussion or
action on your own article and consider joining the Privacynotes
discussion list to contribute your opinion on the spam issue.
------------------------- Mike Banks Valentine Privacynotes Discussion
List Protecting Privacy is Good for Business http://www.privacynotes.com/lists/iprivacy/summary.html
SUBSCRIBE: mailto:Privacynotes-join-request@list.privacynotes.com
===> TOPIC: DIGITAL ID & PUBLIC IDENTITY?
From: Internetweek Poll
What role will efforts to build public identity platforms such
as Microsoft Passport or the Liberty Alliance play in your enterprise's
authentication and single-sign-on strategies?
http://www.internetweek.com/question02/question042502.htm
[ moderator comment: ]
Digital ID is central to the privacy issue and internetweek
is seeking feedback from the online community. While it is clear
that many online publications such as InternetWeek and ClickZ
and our own Eric Norlin's DigitalIDWorld are keenly interested
in public feedback on these core issues. Where do you stand? This
forum needs your input as well. Chime in with your own opinions.
// -- CONTINUING DISCUSSION -- //
===> TOPIC: PRIVACY FEE?
From: Mike Valentine
I'd like to re-ignite a little spark from last week that I expected
to turn into an Arizona-sized blaze, but somehow it attracted
no comment from subscribers. Maybe everyone was in a hurry to
put out their own fires last week, but I'd like to encourage discussion
around this topic as it is a very powerful idea cloaked in a puny
news story (217 words) published last month. Maybe I'm biased.
;-) I'll just reproduce the post from Eric Schwartzman below and
request that readers give it some extra thought and let's talk
about the idea a bit.
===> TOPIC: PRIVACY POLICY COMPANY?
From: Eric
According to tech consultancy Forrester Research, which published
a report this week about online privacy, consumers would be willing
to sacrifice their privacy for a fee. In a survey sampling 6,000
consumers, 36 percent of women said they would allow their web
browsing to be tracked for a $5 a month discount from their Internet
service provider. 33 Percent of men said they would also be willing
to be tracked for a fee. Forrester said women are more likely
to allow themselves to be tracked than men, since men are more
likely to frequent porn sites.
New York Times reporter Bob Tedeschi wrote a technology brief
about it in today's (May 19) business section (Page C4).
http://makeashorterlink.com/?P21F62E21
Eric Schwartzman www.schwartzmanpr.com
===> TOPIC: PRIVACY POLICY COMPANY?
From: Mike Valentine
I know there are consultants on this list who could answer the
question posed last week by David Hauser. Although it was possibly
resolved offlist, I'd suspect that many readers of Privacynotes would
be interested in an answer to that question as well. I'll leave
it to whomever is interested in the business to answer a clearly
commercial question. One that will be archived permanently by
Privacynotes for access in future (hint-hint). This is an opportunity
that doesn't come often on discussion lists. ;-) Once again, David
Hauser's question:
Hello,
I was wondering if you or someone on the list had a suggestions
for a person or company to help write a privacy policy for me?
Best Regards, David
===> TOPIC: PRIVACY ADVOCACY
From: Eric Norlin
Mike Valentine said: >> Do you think all of this belongs
in one (Homeland Security) central database? <<
No, and I would argue that -- from a biz perspective -- it is
NOT moving that way. Passport's original centralization has been
altered to a distributed plan, and none of MSFT's upcoming identity-based
platforms require centralization (trustbridge, .NET or Palladium)
-- in fact, they all push for decentralization. In turn, the members
of the Liberty Alliance (folks like AMEX, United Airlines, GM)
are explicitly opposed to centralization, in that they do *not*
want to share customer data with each other. To that end, Liberty's
soon to be announced spec will be a token-passing spec that doesn't
allow any customer info to pass.
As for the government's use of digital ID technology, that is
an entirely different matter. The battle over privacy in the gov
space has actually been going on for quite some time. EPIC reports
that the attempts to come up with a National ID have been numerous
and futile over the years. Of course, things are a bit different
this time.
My personal opinion is that there will be a national ID -- and,
as with most government initiatives -- it may turn out to be either
bad or good.
As for Homeland Security linking together databases: people
ask me sometimes why i'm so lax about the idea of the government
knowing everything about me. Admittedly i'm biased -- I worked
in the world of intelligence for a time -- the idea of them knowing
everything doesn't bother me because they already do.
None of the above would seem to indicate that I'm operating
under "blind
trust" -- and i can get more detailed, if you'd like.
tks ejn Senior Editor, Digital ID World www.digitalidworld.com
// -- PRIVACY NEWS -- //
Moderator note: There are two ways to access previously listed
privacy news stories. One is to visit Privacynotes archives, the
other (simpler) way is to visit
http://privacynotes.com/privacy_news.html
where I also keep a privacy news archive.
From Filters to Forwarding: Ways to Fight Junk E-Mail Internet
service providers and filtering companies like Brightmail are
on the front lines of fighting spam. But there are many things
that consumers can do on their own. Prevention Set up multiple
e-mail addresses. Use one for personal e-mail and one or more
disposable ones, those you would not mind abandoning if need be
when registering at Web sites, posting to news groups or taking
part in chat sessions. More ...
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/27/technology/circuits/27TIPS.html
WIMBLEDON, England, July 2 Some of the top players on the women's
Tour are not comfortable with the idea of a lab technician's knocking
on their front doors unannounced. But if the Tour can find the
money, officials would like to begin out-of-competition doping
tests in the next two years. "I just don't think they have any
right to see what's going on inside your body if you're not doing
anything," said Jennifer Capriati, who advanced to the Wimbledon
quarterfinals today. "I've never heard of anything to be concerned
about anyways.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/03/sports/03WIMB.html?tntemail1
