New Report on Privacy and Crowdsourced Missing Persons Registries
From: Fordham Law School and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
Contact: Peter Pochna, Rubenstein Associates, 212-843-8007, ppochna@rubenstein.com
FORDHAM LAW AND THE WOODROW WILSON CENTER RELEASE REPORT ON PRIVACY ISSUES RAISED BY MISSING PERSONS DATABASES
NEW YORK, NY AND WASHINGTON, DC (April XX, 2013) - The Fordham Center on Law and Information Policy (CLIP) at Fordham Law School and the Commons Lab of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars today issued a report titled “Privacy and Missing Persons after Natural Disasters,” prepared as part of a joint project. The report is available for free download at:
http://www.scribd.com/collections/3840667/Commons-Lab-Science-and-Technology-Innovation-Program-STIP and http://ssrn.com/abstract=2229610
The report offers a roadmap to the legal and policy issues surrounding privacy and missing persons following natural disasters. It provides strategies that humanitarian organizations, private sector organizations, volunteers and policy makers can pursue to help those affected by major natural disasters. For example, the report recommends that the United States government exercise existing legal authority to support appropriate sharing of personal information about missing persons following natural disasters. More broadly, the report recommends that those developing technologies to share information about missing persons implement design principles that carefully balance privacy consistent with existing legal obligations. The report also calls on privacy policy makers, legislators, and regulators to take steps to clarify how privacy rules apply to missing persons activities in identified key areas so that missing persons activities can proceed without the threat of legal liability.
“With this project, Fordham CLIP is trying to help the people and organizations assisting in the location of missing persons recognize and deal with critical privacy issues by providing a range of options to address the legal and policy concerns,” said Joel R. Reidenberg, the academic director of Fordham CLIP and a co-author of the report. Robert Gellman, a privacy expert and co-author of the report, added, “Missing persons services are essential following natural disasters, but they can raise questions about how privacy laws apply to emergency humanitarian responses. The report suggests ways to resolve those questions.”
The project is part of an international effort led by the Missing Persons Community of Interest (MPCI) that is seeking to harmonize a wide array of databases and technologies to enhance searches for missing persons following natural disasters. MPCI, which emerged in response to the 2010 Haitian earthquake, includes participants from local disaster management, international humanitarian relief organizations, private sector technology companies, non-profits, and digital volunteer communities.
Tim Schwartz, the chair of MPCI, said the report “gives us for the first time a thorough analysis of how missing persons technologies impact individual privacy and provides us with a valuable framework that will help us refine these critical and complex systems.” Lea Shanley, director of the Commons Lab at the Wilson Center, added, “Response organizations and volunteer groups must work to find an appropriate balance between protecting privacy and safety, and facilitating critical information sharing about affected populations and missing persons during and after disasters. This research will inform the development of privacy guidelines and best practices.”
The report examined privacy issues created by missing persons activities following several recent natural disasters, such as the earthquake in Christchurch, New Zealand in February 2011 and Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans in August 2005. The report identified New Zealand as a leader in addressing the privacy issues that follow natural disasters and in prompting the world’s data protection authorities to pay more attention to those issues. The report discusses the New Zealand response and shows what other data protection authorities can do to provide clarity in applying privacy rules to missing persons activities.
Joining Reidenberg on the team that created the report are Gellman, a privacy and information policy consultant who previously served as chief counsel to the U.S. House of Representative Government Operations Committee and served as a member of the National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics at the U.S. Health and Human Services Department, Jamela Debelak, CLIP’s executive director, and CLIP student researchers Adam Elewa and Nancy Liu.
The project was supported by the Wilson Center and a gift made by Fordham University alumnus and trustee Ed Stroz and his digital risk management company, Stroz Friedberg.
The Commons Lab of the Wilson Center’s Science and Technology Innovation Program seeks to advance research and independent policy analysis on emerging technologies that facilitate collaborative, science-based and citizen-driven decision-making, with an emphasis on their social, legal, and ethical implications. The initiative does not advocate for or against specific technological platforms, rather works to ensure that these technologies are developed and used in a way that maximizes benefits while reducing risks and unintended consequences. Our work often focuses on novel governance options at the “edges” where the crowd and social media operate—between formal organizations and emergent networks, and between proprietary and open models of data ownership and access.
The Fordham Center on Law and Information Policy (CLIP) was founded to make significant contributions to the development of law and policy for the information economy and to teach the next generation of leaders. CLIP brings together scholars, the bar, the business community, technology experts, the policy community, students, and the public to address and assess policies and solutions for cutting-edge issues that affect the evolution of the information economy.
Massachusetts Supreme Court Rules ZIP Codes Are Definitely “Personal Identification Information”
by Erin Aures, Privacy Law Blog, April 1, 2013
In a recent ruling arising from certain certified questions in Tyler v. Michaels Stores, Inc., Civ. No. 11-10920-WGY D. Mass. Jan. 6, 2012, the Massachusetts Supreme Court interpreted “personal identification information” under Mass. Gen. Laws, ch. 93, § 105a Section 105a to include a consumer’s ZIP code and determined that collecting such personal information is a violation of state privacy law for which the consumer can sue see slip opinion. By way of background, the plaintiff, Tyler, alleged she was making a credit card purchase at Michaels an arts and crafts retailer when a cashier asked her for her ZIP code. Tyler provided her ZIP code. Tyler alleged her ZIP code was later used by Michaels to find Tyler’s mailing address and telephone numbers and send her unwanted and unsolicited marketing materials. …
For full text of the analysis, visit Massachusetts Supreme Court Rules ZIP Codes Are Definitely “Personal Identification Information” | Privacy Law Blog.
Related articles
- Bucks: Why Retailers Ask for Your ZIP Code (bucks.blogs.nytimes.com)
- Zip Codes Are Private Info, Says Massachusetts Supreme Court (blogs.lawyers.com)
- Bed Bath & Beyond Sued Over Zip Code Data (insideprivacy.com)
- Why you shouldn’t tell stores your ZIP code (nbcnews.com)
Google Admits Street View Project Violated Privacy
By David Streitfeld, NYT Technology, March 12, 2013
Google on Tuesday acknowledged to state officials that it had violated people’s privacy during its Street View mapping project when it casually scooped up passwords, e-mail and other personal information from unsuspecting computer users. In agreeing to settle a case brought by 38 states involving the project, the search company for the first time is required to aggressively police its own employees on privacy issues and to explicitly tell the public how to fend off privacy violations like this one.
For full text of the article, visit Google Admits Street View Project Violated Privacy – NYTimes.com.
Related articles
- Google Maps with Street View on iOS: what it can and can’t do (reviews.cnet.com)
- Google settles Street View privacy case with 38 states for $7 million (theverge.com)
ASFPM Releases Report on Cost of Flood Mapping for the Nation
Flood Mapping for the Nation: A Cost Analysis for the Nation’s Flood Map Inventory
Tuesday, March 05, 2013 The Association of State Floodplain Managers (ASFPM) urges national investment in a comprehensive, updated flood map inventory for every community in the US. This will drive down costs and suffering from flooding on our nation and its citizens, as well as providing the best tool for managing flood risk and building sustainable communities.
For full text and to download a copy of the report, visit The Association of State Floodplain Managers | ASFPM.
Related articles
- More Resources on Floods – from ASFPM (recoverydiva.com)
A Drone Flew Within 200 Feet Of A Commercial Jet. How Legal Was It?
by Kelsey Atherton, Pop Sci, March 6, 2013
Yesterday morning, an Alitalia pilot reported seeing a remote-controlled aircraft near New York’s JFK airport, where he was landing. The drone was flying about 4 to 5 miles west of the airport at an altitude of about 1,750 feet, and it came within just 200 feet of the Alitalia plane, the pilot said. … But was it legal?
…Law is slow to catch up to new technology, so drones are not currently regulated in U.S. air space. The FAA is in the process of picking drone-testing sites, which will be used to help develop domestic drone rules. Until then, unmanned aircraft are governed by model airplane rules, and model airplane rules are pretty lax….
For full text of this article, please visit A Drone Flew Within 200 Feet Of A Commercial Jet. How Legal Was It? | Popular Science.
Related articles
Is Your User Content Online Legally Yours?
by David Pogue, Scientific American, March 5, 2013
Instagram, the phone app that lets you take pictures, apply artsy filters and then share them, is huge. …Then, late last year, Instagram did something massively stupid: it changed its terms of use, the document of rules for using the service. The new terms included this gem: “You agree that a business or other entity may pay us to display your username, likeness, photos … without any compensation to you.The backlash was swift and vicious. …People quit Instagram en masse. Lawyers filed a class-action suit….
For full text of this article, please visit Scientific American Is Your User Content Online Legally Yours?: Scientific American.
Related articles
- Is Your User Content Online Legally Yours? (scientificamerican.com)
- The Scientific American Blog Network is not Scientific American (blogs.scientificamerican.com)
- Twitter vs. Instagram: The Showdown in an Infographic (mashable.com)
To License or Not to License Geospatial Data: Still a Challenge for Government Agencies
All Points Blog, Feb 25, 2013
Tim de Troye from the State of South Carolina offered a presentation that is an ongoing issue among states and local governments about how they distribute geospatial data collected with taxpayer money. He recognized that some organizations copyright their data and that data in South Carolina, for example, is available but through different agreements depending on whether it is spatial or not.
The big question in licensing geospatial data is to license or not to license?
For full text of this article, please visit To License or Not to License Geospatial Data: Still a Challenge for Government Agencies – All Points Blog.
Related articles
- Spatial experts added to Immigration’s skills shortage list (computerworld.co.nz)
- New NRC Report: Future U.S. Workforce for Geospatial Intelligence (geodatapolicy.wordpress.com)
The Privacy Legal Implications of Big Data: A Primer
By David Navetta, Information Law Group, February 12, 2013
By now many lawyers and business managers have heard of the term “Big Data,” but many may not understand exactly what it refers to, and still more likely do not know how it will impact their clients and business or perhaps it already is. Big Data is everywhere quite literally. …
The potential uses and benefits of Big Data are endless. Unfortunately, Big Data also poses some risk to both the companies seeking to unlock its potential, and the individuals whose information is now continuously being collected, combined, mined, analyzed, disclosed and acted upon. This post explores the concept of Big Data and some of the privacy-related legal issues and risks associated with it.
For full text of this legal discussion, please visit The Privacy Legal Implications of Big Data: A Primer | InfoLawGroup.
Related articles
- Big data collection collides with privacy concerns, analysts say (pcworld.com)
- Big Data: 2013 Trends And Predictions (blogs.sap.com)
ABOUT
Disclaimer: This is a personal blog of links to relevant news, events, and reports, provided for educational purposes only. The opinions and views contained therein are those only of the authors of the original articles. These opinions do not necessarily reflect those of the editor of this blog; the Woodrow Wilson Center; the Science and Technology Innovation Program; its staff, scholars, or interns.
