 | |
| |
TechnologyDaily Mobile
Privacy Fight Rages In Minnesota
by Liza Porteus
Many officials in the high-tech industry are lobbying against a comprehensive Internet privacy bill in Minnesota that would regulate the use and dissemination of consumer information by Internet service providers (ISPs).
The bill, S.F. 2908, could be the most comprehensive privacy legislation passed by an individual state since the 1999 federal enactment of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley financial privacy law. The measure would require ISPs to: get consumer consent before sharing personal information with third parties -- an approach commonly known as an "opt in"; disclose certain consumer information pursuant to wiretapping laws; and provide customers with secure, verifiable accounts. It also would allow consumers to sue for violations.
The two legislative chambers in the state passed competing privacy bills last month. The Senate measure favors an opt-in policy, while its House companion bill, H.F. 3625, includes the opt-out approach, where ISPs could share consumer information unless consumers say otherwise. Negotiators met Tuesday to resolve differences in the bills and will meet again Monday.
The NetCoalition -- comprised of companies such as AOL Time Warner, DoubleClick, Inktomi, Lycos, Verio and Yahoo -- is one of the groups urging Minnesota lawmakers not to enact the Senate language. "NetCoalition's members recognize the importance of protecting the privacy of online consumers, but we think this bill will have the opposite effect," NetCoalition Executive Director Kevin McGuiness said in a statement.
The NetCoalition on Friday sent a letter to Senate bill sponsor Steve Kelley, and House bill sponsor Tim Pawlenty. The group argued, among other things, that the bill would undermine current federal efforts to combat terrorism, arbitrarily penalize certain Internet companies and spark years of litigation.
The Senate bill would prohibit the disclosure of information about suspected hackers to law enforcement and hold Internet companies liable if a hacker or a terrorist obtained private information about consumers, the NetCoalition argued. The group also said the bill would apply to companies that do business primarily over the Internet but not to Web sites accessed via cable or satellite hookups, or to companies that do business both offline and online.
Groups and companies such as the electronics trade group AeA, the Consumer Electronics Association, the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, AOL, Apple Computer, eBay and Verizon also oppose the bill, according to the NetCoalition.
"We have some very serious concerns" regarding the class-action provision in the bill and opt-in nature of the measure, said Joe Rubin, director of congressional affairs for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. "Frankly the fact that this is the first-in-the-nation state regulation of the Internet, I think, in and of itself, raises a lot of concerns generally ... about precedent [value] and constitutional concerns."
The new Internet Commerce Coalition also opposes the bill. Speaking for the group, Jim Halperin, an attorney with Piper, Marbury, Rudnick and Wolfe, said the "sponsors have very good intent, but I don't think they have a full understanding of how the Internet works."
He said other groups and companies lobbying against the bill include the American Insurance Corporation, the Association for Competitive Technology, the Information Technology Association of America, the Software And Information Industry Association, EarthLink, Experian, RealNetworks and WorldCom.
Kelley said he met last week with groups opposing the bill and drafted an amendment to address some of their specific concerns, but he said the opt-in principle stays. He said the industry groups have been late in the game to criticize the bill, especially since the Senate passed a similar bill a few years ago.
"I think we can take care of 90 percent of the concerns. There's just 10 percent at the core -- which is, they don't want it," Kelley said. "So we'll just see whether the interest groups or the consumers win that battle."
Kelley said passing the law for ISPs has the same purpose as a current federal and state law that applies to cable-television operators, which cannot disclose viewing habits without consumer consent. He also noted that information such as video-rental records is subject to opt-in rules.
Kelley is "hopeful" that an opt-in bill will emerge from the conference committee and is "pretty confident" that it will get out of the Senate. But he cautioned that "any time such large organizations decide that their goal is to stop a bill, you can't be overly optimistic."
Colorado Sets Tech Plan
Colorado has released a four-year statewide information technology plan.
Released by Technology Secretary Mark Holtzman and Chief Information Officer Robert Feingold, the plan for 2003-2006 outlines the visions, goals and objectives for how state government intends to use IT resources to improve communication and interaction among state government and its citizens, businesses and employees.
The plan has three goals: to deliver efficient and effective government services; to improve the convenience, accessibility and security of state government services; and to develop policies and procedures for effective management of technology investments. At the end of each year, the Office of Innovation and Technology will report on the status of achieving each goal.
Certain guidelines must be followed while state agencies implement the vision, including protecting citizen data and privacy while maintaining the free flow of information.
Grassley Asks For Tech Funds
Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, has asked the Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee for $73.3 million in additional funds for fiscal 2002 to boost the communications network technology the National Guard uses for homeland security training. About $20 million of the money would be used for the Iowa National Guard's Consolidated Interactive Virtual Information Center (CIVIC), which delivers homeland defense training and information to military units and government and community agencies.
Grassley said the technology would be most valuable when allowing public safety officials to receive similar training regardless of their location. The funds could be used to provide digitized learning content and remote-access capabilities, and to provide commercially secure video-teleconferencing capability, among other things.
"As communities continue to step up their domestic preparedness efforts in response to [the] Sept. 11 [terrorist attacks], a certain amount of training and resources are required," Grassley said in a letter. "This technology provides unparalleled opportunities for federal, state and local governments, including 'first responders' [to emergencies], to support homeland security initiatives nationwide."
Where's The Best Small Tech Region Of All?
Small Times magazine has named the top six U.S. regions for small technology hubs. Silicon Valley was ranked first, with more than 50 small tech companies, and the southern California areas of Los Angeles, Orange County and San Diego ranked second, with 20 small tech companies, national research facilities and programs at four major universities.
Boston ranked third, with its research capabilities at Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Metropolitan New York City and New Jersey took fourth place, with their mix of industry-educational partnerships, access to venture capital and educated workforce.
Texas' Austin, Dallas and Houston regions ranked fifth thanks to the working relationships among their small tech industries, universities and government, and the Texas Nanotechnology Initiative. And Chicago ranked sixth, with its research base, top universities, two national labs and venture-capital community.
The magazine identified Albuquerque, N.M., Michigan, New York state, Ohio, North Carolina's Research Triangle and Washington as areas that could challenge the top regions.
NEW FEATURE
-Advertisement-
-Advertisement-
-Advertisement-
