I was doing some research for my project 3 topic when I came across a Reuters article regarding children’s online privacy. My project 3 paper deals mainly with the interaction between the government and the people. After reading this article and a few others, I felt that maybe I should include the businesses as part of the discussion, because it seems companies are the ones that look for and use personal information that is all over the web today.
This article talks mainly about how the US government is seeking to sue Sony for allowing children under the age of 13 to register as users on their online music sites. From my research, online child privacy laws date back to 1998 with the approval of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998. This law was aimed at preventing any information that children may unwittlingly release online to be used by advertisers and other such people who would use the information to gain revenue, consumers, etc. The laws have evolved since then. It was interesting to note that Sony had violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule which stems from the Act of 1998. The lawsuit filed in Manhattan sought to fine Sony for its violation of the Act as enforced by the FTC.
It was hinted at that Sony would agree to pay a #1 million dollar fine as well as putting in place a screening process that complies with the FTC rules and hiring a web compliance officer to monitor the issue for the future.
The issue with Sony brings about the question that has been around for the entire course, how far does online privacy go? Is it the job of the government to protect us from online criminals and manipulative businesses, or should it be the users that protect themselves? After all, we live in a 2.0 society where we actively give out personal information. Although many people see this as the reason for having a government, to protect the people, we still have to at least try to help ourselves instead of hoping someone else will do it for us.
1 Comment
December 11, 2008 at 9:29 pm
This brings up the same issues that the last article on whether or not the White House should oversee cybersecurity. Who knows what the outcome would be if this position actually came to fruition. Clearly, we as users need something to help secure our privacy and our information from potential dangers. However, we also do not want them to restrict our Web 2.0 advancements. I guess I would say it is a necessary position to have, and I think, although I could be wrong, that this is more of a positive thing for us, rather than a negative thing. As far as the children aspect, I think it is more the responsibility of parents to control what their children have access to on the internet.