Not everyone gets to take classes in high school that deeply impact the direction of their life. I was fortunate enough to take two such classes. The first was American Government, and the second was Morals vs. Ethics. It was the combination of lessons learned in these two classes that led me to work in the data privacy field.
Over the course of my professional life, I have been responsible for building software for e-commerce, payment processing, and financial institutions. In every instance, the driving forces for change were money and legality. I was tasked with doing everything within the letter of the law in order to maintain high profits for the companies I worked for…even if it meant using deceptive practices.
Morals vs. Ethics
“You cannot legislate morality.”
Most of the current privacy laws only require disclosures, notifications, and public signals of intention. Many privacy companies will store a user’s privacy signals, expose them, and even send emails asking for data corrections. It is up to the receiving software to read those signals and take action. A company will do what is “right” in accordance with the law, but that’s where the efforts end.
How can you possibly create laws requiring businesses to properly manage data privacy when people are throwing their data around so freely? Should companies be required to be proactive when it comes to their customer’s data, or is that the customer’s responsibility? What is the incentive to actively protect data and do what is “good”?
“Voting with a dollar is more powerful than voting with a ballot.”
At Osano we have taken a stance to do what is “good” in addition to what is “right”. We have implemented practices in our software that treat everyone the way we (as humans using technology) would want to be treated. This comes in the form of easy to understand language, proactive privacy measures, and constant legal monitoring.
I believe that when a customer sees that you are doing what is in their best interests, they will vote with their dollars. They will continue to patronize you, they will endorse you, and they will stop using your competitors.
Last Week Tonight talks data brokers
The April 10th episode of “Last Week Tonight” discussed data brokers and what they do with consumers’ private information, the importance of privacy, and the history of privacy laws. See what John Oliver has to say below!
Colorado Privacy Act pre-rulemaking considerations
The Colorado Attorney General’s Office sent an update this week on the creation of the Colorado Privacy Act (CPA). They’ve released their list of pre-rulemaking considerations, which includes topics like Univeral Opt-Out, Consent, Profiling, and more. They’re also requesting the public’s input.
Ex-Apple employee takes Face ID privacy complaint to Europe
A former employee at Apple, Ashley Gjøvik, has submitted a 54-page “privacy invasion complaint” against Apple with Ireland’s Data Protection Commission (DPC). The document outlines concerns for Apple’s employee privacy, noting Apple’s gathering of biometric data, anti-employee privacy policies, and “unlawfully restrictive” NDAs.