PRIVACY Forum Archive Document
PRIVACY Forum Digest Friday, 7 July 1995 Volume 04 : Issue 15 Moderated by Lauren Weinstein (email@example.com) Vortex Technology, Woodland Hills, CA, U.S.A. ===== PRIVACY FORUM ===== The PRIVACY Forum digest is supported in part by the ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy, and the Data Services Division of MCI Communications Corporation. CONTENTS Caller-ID for psychic knowledge (Rita C. Summers) Re: Why can't I see Equifax medical records? (Stanley Quayle) Re: Comedy Central - why have a password? (Martin Minow) Thermal imaging (Beth Givens) MasterCard Asks America [fwd] (Lance J. Hoffman) Do Readers Have a Right to Be Left Alone? (Thomas C. Leonard) V-Chip (Stephen Nelson) Re: V-Chip (Lauren Weinstein; PRIVACY Forum Moderator) Tracking parolees (Phil Agre) International Cryptography Institute 1995: Global Challenges (Dorothy Denning) Sixth Conference on Comupters, Freedom, and Privacy (Hal Abelson) National Privacy & Public Policy Symposium (RAKEROYD@csunet.ctstateu.edu) *** Please include a RELEVANT "Subject:" line on all submissions! *** *** Submissions without them may be ignored! *** ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Internet PRIVACY Forum is a moderated digest for the discussion and analysis of issues relating to the general topic of privacy (both personal and collective) in the "information age" of the 1990's and beyond. The moderator will choose submissions for inclusion based on their relevance and content. Submissions will not be routinely acknowledged. All submissions should be addressed to "firstname.lastname@example.org" and must have RELEVANT "Subject:" lines; submissions without appropriate and relevant "Subject:" lines may be ignored. Excessive "signatures" on submissions are subject to editing. Subscriptions are by an automatic "listserv" system; for subscription information, please send a message consisting of the word "help" (quotes not included) in the BODY of a message to: "email@example.com". Mailing list problems should be reported to "firstname.lastname@example.org". All messages included in this digest represent the views of their individual authors and all messages submitted must be appropriate to be distributable without limitations. The PRIVACY Forum archive, including all issues of the digest and all related materials, is available via anonymous FTP from site "ftp ftp.vortex.com", in the "/privacy" directory. Use the FTP login "ftp" or "anonymous", and enter your e-mail address as the password. The typical "README" and "INDEX" files are available to guide you through the files available for FTP access. PRIVACY Forum materials may also be obtained automatically via e-mail through the listserv system. Please follow the instructions above for getting the listserv "help" information, which includes details regarding the "index" and "get" listserv commands, which are used to access the PRIVACY Forum archive. All PRIVACY Forum materials are available through the Internet Gopher system via a gopher server on site "gopher.vortex.com/". Access to PRIVACY Forum materials is also available through the Internet World Wide Web (WWW) via the Vortex Technology WWW server at the URL: "http://www.vortex.com". ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- VOLUME 04, ISSUE 15 Quote for the day: "Those who are tardy will not get fruit cup." -- Nurse Diesel (Cloris Leachman) "High Anxiety" (1977) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 18 Jun 95 18:02:12 EDT From: "Rita C. Summers" <email@example.com> Subject: Caller-ID for psychic knowledge Philip Yam, writing in the July Scientific American, mentions an innovative use of Caller-ID. The context is a profile on James Randi, who specializes in debunking "pseudoscientific and paranormal claims." Yam writes: "[Randi] cites a self-proclaimed psychic who calls himself 'The Great Samaritan.' Advertising on Spanish-language television, he asks viewers to dial a 900-number for psychic advice. With caller-identification technology and banks of networked computers at their disposal, operators can obtain financial and health records, convincing their unsuspecting callers of their astrological prowess." Rita Summers [ Of course, if they were real psychics, they wouldn't need Caller-ID anyway--they'd already know the number you were calling from... -- MODERATOR ] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 Jun 1995 11:22:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Stanley Quayle <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: Why can't I see Equifax medical records? > He told me that there was a general convention in the credit business that > medical creditors _only_ looked at your _medical_ credit entries, and that > all other types of creditors customarily _ignored_ your medical credit; > there's (according to him) a kind of Chinese Wall between the two sides of > the house. > > We'd all, I'm sure, be interested to know if this is really the answer, > though. It's not the answer. Medical records can only be released to a physician. The theory is that you wouldn't understand the content of your records, and professional help might be required in case the records indicate a disease or condition of which you aren't aware. And there's no separate category of "medical credit". Your creditors, medical or otherwise, are the same. --Stan ----------------- Stanley F. Quayle N8SQ +1 614 276-7507 Fax: +1 614 276-2439 3375 Fisher Rd., Columbus, OH 43204-1412 USA Internet: email@example.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 Jun 95 11:45:19 -0700 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Martin Minow) Subject: re: Comedy Central - why have a password? email@example.com (Dr. Frederick B. Cohen) notes in Privacy V04 #13 that the Comedy Central cable channel has a password protected Web Site with a publicly-available password, and wonders why this would be needed. Here are a few speculative answers: -- They don't know better (this is my choice). -- They want to give their viewers a sense of belonging (i.e., a "secret decoder ring") that gives them a sense of superiority/community. -- They publish different UserID/Password combinations on different uplinks, or at different times, to get a better sense of their demographics. (If you read the computer trade magazines, you'll notice that the major mail-order companies use a great number of 800 numbers -- the one you use tells them where you read their advertisement.) Martin Minow [ Demographics are probably the key. The issues involved in gathering even moderately accurate statistics regarding user populations accessing web pages are non-trivial. "Registration" of various sorts, even if only to force a person to "login" once during a session so they may be counted as having taken that specific action, is one technique being tried in various quarters. -- MODERATOR ] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Jun 1995 17:56:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Beth Givens <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: thermal imaging The most recent issue of _The John Marshall Journal of Computer and Information Law_ has an article about thermal imaging: "Thermal Imaging and the Fourth Amendment: Pushing the Katz Test towards Terminal Velocity" by Daniel J. Polatsek (vol. 13, no. 3, spring 1995) Beth Givens Voice: 619-260-4806 Project Director Fax: 619-260-4753 Privacy Rights Clearinghouse Hotline (Calif. only): Center for Public Interest Law 800-773-7748 University of San Diego e-mail: email@example.com 5998 Alcala Park San Diego, CA 92110 [ Thanks for the "hot" tip! -- MODERATOR ] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Jun 1995 15:46:39 -0400 (EDT) From: "Lance J. Hoffman" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: MasterCard Asks America (fwd) Forwarded message: Date: Thu, 22 Jun 1995 11:40:16 -0700 From: Susan Evoy <evoy@pcd.Stanford.EDU> Subject: MasterCard Asks America Dear CPSR Privacy and Civil Liberties Expert, CPSR received a mailing from MasterCard today that looked interesting. The subtitle of the Press Release is "MasterCard Stops on Information Super-Highway to Get Directions." The program runs until Independence Day. "The goal of the program is to find out how consumers feel about marketing practices that involve the collection, sale and use of consumer information." *************************** MasterCard Asks America MasterCard wants to hear your views about the use of consumer information by business. What are the benefits you see from targetted offers and special mailings? How do you feel when businesses provide information on products and services through the mail or over the phone? What would you like to know that would give you more control over the offers you receive? We welcome your thoughts on these or any other aspect of consumer privacy by mail, phone or e-mail. Call Toll Free 1-800-MC-AK-U-1 (1-800-622-7581) Write to MasterCard Asks America PO Box 27972, Washington, DC 20038-7972 Or e-mail email@example.com or http://www.mastercard.com -- Professor Lance J. Hoffman Dept of Elec Eng and Comp Sci, The Geo Washington U, 801 22nd St NW Wash DC 20052 (202) 994-4955 Fax: (202) 994-0227 firstname.lastname@example.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jun 1995 10:53:18 PST From: <LEONARD@rosebud.berkeley.edu> Subject: Do Readers Have a Right to Be Left Alone? Privacy Forum has frequently cast a worried eye over the direct mail industry but has rarely looked at the commercial media that have greater potential to gather information about citizens-- newspapers and magazines. PUBLISHERS FIND GOLD IN DATABASES, Advertising Age has announced. Outside marketing circles, however, the discovery is little noted. The nuggets here are information about the reader, especially the subscriber's name and address. There is a brisk trade in these lists. Your name on the subscription record of an upscale magazine is worth a dime or two, every time it is sold. A single magazine may sell your name twenty-five times a year. Many of the most respected American magazines, such as the Atlantic and the New Yorker, hawk reader's names in the trade press. Names are not in short supply. Conde Nast has collected eleven million names; Times Mirror had fifteen million; Hearst had fifty million; Meredith had fifty-six million; and Reader's Digest had data on line for one hundred million people, worldwide. Beyond the bare facts of subscription, the database gold mine that the press is staking out consists of information that the public may never have of thought of as a commodity: their own names when they write letters to the editor or pay for their subscription with a credit card; births, deaths, marriages and divorces that come into the news; job switches; degrees and licenses that people have earned; donations to local events and charities. Seen this way, a great deal of local news is saleable data that marketers would like to have. Crime reports, for instance, can become names and addresses of people who will be good customers for burglar alarms and security lights. List building is a new imperative of the newspaper business. The Cowles Publishing Company in Spokane, Washington has pioneered in segmenting its readers. Thanks to contests, the daily paper knows who owns dogs and who has young children (they were flushed out in a drawing for circus tickets). In Cedar Rapids, Iowa, the Gazette's MediaStar software allows reporters to use customer profiles in writing stories and the marketing staff to use news items in the search for more customers. With a click on a desktop computer, any street in Cedar Rapids can be summoned up, and every dwelling will glow with a color that reveals the resident's social and economic position. The Washington Post, like other papers with the CityLine audiotex, gives information to readers for free and in return builds a valuable database. The names and numbers of callers with specific interests--stock quotes, skiing conditions, sports scores--are used in the paper's own promotions and sold to direct mail entrepreneur. The trade journal Editor & Publisher has noted that "when readers call a phone number for a survey of information, it gives newspapers an unprecedented opportunity to capture information about who those might be and what the key might be to their wants and desires." This is truly uncharted territory for journalism. What will happen when papers have comprehensive, detailed databases on their community and can trade this information for good will--a process that has begun. Which charities, which religions, which political interest groups will be favored with this information? Citizens may feel that their voluntary association is being guided by the press. With the integration of news and marketing, the press will know more than anybody else about everyone's business. And journalists may also gain the suspicion that goes with comprehensive knowledge. The press will have the public relations problem of credit agencies, motor vehicle registries, and tax collectors. I hope, too, that the press will get critical attention from people who contribute to Privacy Forum. The much-watched Direct Marketers, after all, have a published ethical code and field questions about what they are up to. The American press has no such industry code for list building and rarely lets readers in on the secret of what it is doing with their names. This challenge to privacy is discussed more fully, with a literature review, in the book Oxford University Press will publish this fall: News for All: America's Coming of Age with the Press (ISBN 0-19-506454-2). I would be glad to hear from other investigators of this marketing trend in American journalism. Thomas C. Leonard Assoc. Dean, Graduate School of Journalism University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, CA 94720-5860 Fax (510) 643-9136 Tel (510) 642-8867 Leonard@Rosebud.Berkeley.Edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jun 95 14:14:00 PDT From: "Nelson, Stephen I-Net SSB" <email@example.com> Subject: V-Chip The V-Chip may be the best thing to happen to us all in years. It really makes concrete a glaring hole in the "Community standards" argument that has been developing for awhile. As I understand it, the "community standards" test was designed in reaction to broadcast media that couldn't be blocked from coming into every home. However, with the development of cable (which scrambles channels until you subscribe to them), people didn't have to be exposed to obscene material unless they requested it. Now we have on-line services, which you have to go looking for and in certain cases (Usenet news groups, for example) subscribe to. Now, we are seeing the possibility of blocking ALL content that a household finds objectionable. If I ask for something that no one else can get except me in the privacy of my home, what community am I part of? and whose standards will I be offending? [ For those unfamiliar with the term, "V-Chip" refers to a concept which is part of the recently passed U.S. Senate Telecommunications rewrite bill (though not so far in the House version) which would mandate a device to be included in new television receivers to theoretically allow parents to "block" programming tagged as "violent" from being seen by their children. More on this below. -- MODERATOR ] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jun 95 12:26:35 PDT From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Lauren Weinstein; PRIVACY Forum Moderator) Subject: Re: V-Chip Stephen Nelson <email@example.com> writes: > The V-Chip may be the best thing to happen to us all in years. It really > makes concrete a glaring hole in the "Community standards" argument that has > been developing for awhile. This is one of those cases where what seems reasonable in theory may be quite undesirable in practice. The problems of defining what would cause a program to be labeled as "violent" or otherwise offensive is a very difficult one. The MPAA (the motion picture organization which assigns film ratings) has had a hard time with this for years, and protracted battles are often fought over PG vs. PG-13 vs. R ratings. A film getting an R rating can doom its being playable in many venues. The problem will be much worse with television, given the much larger number of shows, types of shows, and the rapid turnover of programming. Who is going to make these decisions? I wasn't being facetious in a recent digest when I asked if "Road Runner" cartoons will be considered too violent--or the evening news. Is the next step to try label programs as anti-family if they show unmarried persons kissing too passionately? Or if they mention abortion? Or discuss a political party the parents vote against? Unlike the online universe with its vast number of potential content providers, the universe of available television production funding sources is comparatively small, even when cable and pay channels are considered. There is a general belief in the television industry, which I suspect is justified, that due to the relatively small number of major advertisers who support television programming and production, there will be boycott efforts and related attacks against advertisers who support or buy time on shows classified as "bad" by whatever criteria one group or another cares to use. This has the effect of reducing the choices for everyone, since advertisers tend to shy away from any controversy. They'll be concerned about being labeled as Anti-Whatever for buying time on a show tagged as "violent", regardless of the real content. Would a film like "Schindler's List" make it to an airing on television via this test? Advertisers may also feel that they shouldn't spend their money on programming that can't reach the maximum potential number of viewers--fearing that parents will just leave "V-blocking" mode always enabled so that they don't have to bother judging the merits of individual programs and films. This could make being tagged as a "V" program pretty much the kiss of death with many (most?) advertisers. And of course there's always the problem that by labeling something as forbidden, you make it even more attractive to children--who most likely will be much more adept at handling the controls of the V-Chip sets than their parents will! Parents rightly are concerned about controlling what their children watch on television--though most of the same arguments regarding the purported negative impacts of television were made in the past regarding radio, comic books, 50's & 60's rock 'n' roll, jazz, and even classic literature. However, many persons feel that the V-Chip concept is an attempt at coming up with an overly "simple" solution to a complex problem, a "solution" which in this case would have significant negative impacts and would in effect result in the censoring (through non-production and non-airing) of a wide variety of programming (some of high quality and some not) that adults would wish to view. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jul 1995 20:31:50 -0700 From: Phil Agre <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: tracking parolees From a privacy perspective, many of the most worrisome new technologies are emerging from projects to "convert" defense technologies to civilian use. Many of these cases provide grounds for worry that we might be militarizing civilian life. An example of this process is found in the following article: Ed Mendel, SD firm seeks a body "bug" to track parolees, San Diego Union-Tribune, 1 May 1995, pages A1, A10. This article reports work by a San Diego area firm, Science Applications International Corp (SAIC) to produce a tracking device that can be fastened to the body of a parolee. The article opens as follows: A convenience store is robbed. Were any parolees present? A sex offender stops at a schoolyard. Can authorities be alerted? The article rapidly surveys the technical arguments, cites civil liberties concerns, and closes with an endorsement of such systems by Newt Gingrich. How can we reason about this? It's easy to get on a slippery slope. Given the choice between keeping someone in jail for an extra year and putting them on the street with a tracking device, the latter option seems like less of an invasion of privacy -- not to mention cheaper. But, beyond parolees, what is the class of people for whom it is reasonable to prescribe automatic tracking? * probationers? they're mentioned in the article * deadbeat dads? * deadbeat dads who have been caught skipping out on their payments? * other debtors? * people who are temporarily in the country on "guest worker" programs? (in the US these people are known as "illegal aliens") * sex offenders who have served their terms? * children whose parents are worried that they might be kidnapped? * children whose custodial parent has reason to believe that they might be kidnapped by the non-custodial parent? * children whose parents are concerned that they might run away? * children who have run away repeatedly? * gang members? * people who have not been convicted of crimes but who have been served with restraining orders keeping them away from someone's residence or workplace? * people who have repeatedly violated such orders, or who have a history of violence? You can probably extend this list. I would honestly like to know how many people in the United States fall under each of the descriptions I have just offered. Then we can easily total up the percentage of the population that would be automatically tracked if various criteria were adopted. The answer might be scary. But to speak of "tracking" greatly underestimates the capabilities of these systems. If the tracking device is coupled with a cheap communications device such as a pager then the person being tracked can be submitted to an arbitrarily complicated control regime. For example, the person might be restricted to a certain schedule (at work during certain hours and home during all other hours, following commuting routes back and forth), and a protocol might be established to negotiate permission to deviate from the schedule. This negotiation might be similar to the clearing of a credit card in a store. American Express has an elaborate expert system for this purpose, and we might imagine a similar scheme for people whose movements are restricted. Such schemes would probably be framed in humane terms. For example, the Union-Tribune article says: Backers ... say the option of tracking some parolees and probationers could provide more protection for the public, help cut prison costs and carefully control offenders as they learn work habits and make other social adjustments needed for a productive life. What habits and other social adjustments do you need for a productive life? Phil Agre, UCSD [ And of course, the application of such systems might be promoted as "voluntary"--meaning that the person involved would be given the "choice" of either entering the control regime or of spending time in jail, not coming into the country, etc. But are such choices truly voluntary, or are they actually highly coercive situations where little or no voluntary choice is actually involved? -- MODERATOR ] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Jun 95 11:23:07 EDT From: email@example.com (Dorothy Denning) Subject: INTERNATIONAL CRYPTOGRAPHY INSTITUTE 1995: GLOBAL CHALLENGES INTERNATIONAL CRYPTOGRAPHY INSTITUTE 1995: GLOBAL CHALLENGES September 21-22, 1995 Washington, DC Presented by The National Intellectual Property Law Institute The International Cryptography Institute will address the cryptography challenges associated with meeting the information protection needs of users and the law enforcement and national security needs of nations. Topics to be covered include national and international cryptography policies and regulations, international requirements and approaches, commercial cryptography, privacy and trust, key escrow encryption, business requirements, law enforcement requirements, and the use of cryptography with electronic payments. Program September 21 8:30-9:00 Welcome and Opening Remarks James Chandler, President, National Intellectual Property Law Institute Dorothy E. Denning, Chair of Program David Kahn, Visiting Historian, National Security Agency, U.S. 9:00-9:40 Cryptography in Business M. Blake Greenlee, U.S. 9:40-10:20 Commercial Use of Cryptography Nick Mansfield, Shell International, The Netherlands 10:20-10:50 Break 10:50-11:20 Computer Industry Position on Privacy and Trust in an Information Society Yves Le Roux, Digital Equipment Corporation, France 11:20-12:00 The International Cryptography Experiment and Worldwide Cryptographic Products Survey David Balenson, Trusted Information Systems, Inc., U.S. 12:00-12:30 Export Controls on Encryption Software Ira Rubenstein, Microsoft Corp., U.S. 12:30-2:00 Lunch With Keynote Louis J. Freeh, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation 2:00-3:00 Cryptography and the Information Society: Recent Developments in the European Union David J. Gould, Cabinet Office, U.K. 3:00-3:30 Encryption Policy and Technology in Japan Mitsuru Iwamura, The Bank of Japan, Japan 3:30-3:50 Break 3:50-4:30 Towards an Australian Policy on Encryption Peter Ford, Attorney General's Department, Australia 4:30-5:30 International Regulation of Cryptography: An Update James Chandler, National Intellectual Property Law Institute, U.S. 5:30-6:30 Reception September 22 8:30-9:20 U.S. Government Cryptography Policy Michael R. Nelson, Office of Science and Technology Policy, U.S. Ronald D. Lee, National Security Agency, U.S. 9:20-10:10 Law Enforcement Requirements for Encryption William E. Baugh, Jr., Edward L. Allen, Michael D. Gilmore, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. 10:10-10:40 Break 10:40-11:20 International Key Escrow Encryption Dorothy E. Denning, Georgetown University, U.S. 11:20-12:00 Transnational Key Escrow Henry H. Perritt, Jr., Villanova University School of Law, U.S. 12:00-1:30 Lunch 1:30-3:00 Commercial and International Key Escrow Stewart A. Baker, Steptoe & Johnson, U.S., moderator Stephen T. Walker, Trusted Information Systems, Inc., U.S. Frank Sudia, Bankers Trust Company, U.S. Carmi Gressel and Itai Dror, Fortress U & T Ltd., Israel 3:00-3:20 Break 3:20-4:00 Billing and Paying Over the Internet Dan Schutzer, Citibank, U.S. 4:00-4:40 Digital Cash Ernest F. Brickell, Bankers Trust Company, U.S. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - LOCATION AND FEES ICI '95 will be held at the National Intellectual Property Law Institute, 1815 Pennsylvania Ave., Washington, DC, third floor. Registration is $695 before September 1 and $795 thereafter ($395/$495 for U.S. Government). Payment includes all conference materials, two lunches, and a cocktail reception. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - REGISTRATION FORM INTERNATIONAL CRYPTOGRAPHY INSTITUTE 1995: GLOBAL CHALLENGES Name: Organization: Address: Phone: Fee: General U.S. Gov't Before 9/1/95 _____ $695 _____ $395 After 9/1/95 _____ $795 _____ $495 Payment (check one) __ Check payable to The National Intellectual Property Law Institute __ MasterCard __ VISA Card #: Expiration Date: Signature: Registration by Fax: 800-304-MIND Phone: 800-301-MIND 202-296-4098 202-842-4800 Mail Registration with payment to: The National Intellectual Property Law Institute 1815 Pennsylvania Ave., Suite 300, Washington, DC 20006 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 21:35:34 -0700 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Hal Abelson) Subject: Sixth Conference on Comupters, Freedom, and Privacy -- Call for Papers **Please redistribute** Call for Participation (June 27, 1995) SIXTH CONFERENCE ON COMPUTERS, FREEDOM, AND PRIVACY Massachusetts Institute of Technology March 27-30, 1996 The sixth annual Conference on Computers, Freedom, and Privacy (CFP96) will be held in Cambridge, MA, on March 27-30, 1996. The conference is hosted by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and sponsored by the Association for Computing Machinery and the World Wide Web Consortium. Cooperating organizations include the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Privacy International, the Center for Democracy and Technology, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, and the Harvard University Institute for Law, Information, and Technology. CFP96 is the sixth in a series of annual conferences designed to bring together experts and advocates from the fields of computer science, law, business, public policy, law enforcement, library science, and government to explore how information technologies are affecting freedom and privacy. Since the first CFP conference in 1991, these concerns have evolved from the preoccupations of a few specialists to major, controversial issues of public policy. Topics to be addressed at CFP96 include: - regulation of content on computer networks - intellectual property considerations of digital libraries and electronic communications media - enhanced access to public government information - control of cryptographic technology - illegal activity in cyberspace and challenges for law enforcement - privacy implications of national/personal identification systems - standards for transborder data flow and data protection - proper secondary uses of information in government and electronic commerce - new roles for libraries regarding information access and networking. - liability of system operators and network access providers CFP offers a much-needed neutral ground where people from widely different backgrounds and positions can learn from one another other. Presentations at CFP traditionally take the form of interactive panels and discussions, rather than formal papers. The CFP96 Program Committee is currently soliciting proposals for presentations, and we invite your suggestions. We especially invite proposals that place issues in an international context and involve participants from different countries. Proposals may be for individual talks, panel discussions, debates, or other events in appropriate formats. (We welcome ideas for "other events".) Each proposal should be accompanied by a one-page statement describing the topic and format. Descriptions of multi-person presentations should include a list of proposed participants and session chair. Proposals should be sent by email to email@example.com Proposals should be submitted as soon as possible to allow thorough consideration for inclusion in the formal program. The deadline for submissions is 1 September 1995. For more information on CFP96, consult the conference web page at web.mit.edu//cfp96 or send email with a blank subject line and blank body to firstname.lastname@example.org. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 17:24:37 -0400 (EDT) From: RAKEROYD@csunet.ctstateu.edu Subject: National Privacy & Public Policy Symposium THE CONNECTICUT FOUNDATION FOR OPEN GOVERNMENT is Sponsoring a NATIONAL PRIVACY AND PUBLIC POLICY SYMPOSIUM November 3-4, 1995 Hartford, Connecticut COME JOIN US--BE A PART OF HISTORY IN THE MAKING! What and When The National Privacy and Public Policy Symposium will for the first time bring together experts from a broad range of professions to discuss and actually define what privacy is and is not. It will be held on November 3-4, 1995 at the Aetna Life and Casualty Company's Conference Center and Home Office in Hartford, Connecticut. Only 250 seats will be available to the general public. So reserve the dates. Better yet, register now and guarantee your place at this unique event. The Program The symposium will consist of plenary sessions, focused panels and informal gatherings. The symposium will be led by Claire L. Gaudiani, President of Connecticut College. Dr. Gaudiani has an expertise in public policy development, a knowledge of the concepts of privacy and the facility to lead a diverse group of exceptionally capable people in a discourse that policy-makers and the public can readily comprehend. Professor Alan Westin of Columbia University, who wrote the seminal article on modern concepts of privacy in America, will present a social and legal history of privacy. Professor Westin's history, along with individual panel papers and the proceedings of the symposium, will be published. Vice President Albert Gore and FBI Director Louis Freeh have been invited as luncheon and dinner speakers. In addition, an internationally prominent faculty will focus on key privacy issues in bio-technology and medicine, business, the economics of information (information as an asset), government information practices and freedom of information, information and communications technologies, journalism, law (constitutional, criminal, intellectual property and tort) and national security and law enforcement. The Organizers The Connecticut Foundation for Open Government (CFOG) is a tax-exempt, non-profit corporation established to increase public awareness and understanding of the benefits and importance of open government. Its board of directors is composed of leaders from business, education, government and the news media. What You Can Do If you would like more information about the National Privacy and Public Policy Symposium, or would like to pre-register, fill out and return the Pre-registration Form. Registration by the general public is limited and will be accepted on a first-come basis. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Pre-registration Form Send To: National Privacy & Public Policy Symposium 18-20 Trinity Street Hartford, Connecticut 06106 _________________________________________________________________ (Name) (Mailing Address) _________________________________________________________________ (Title) (City, State, Zip Code) _________________________________________________________________ (Organization) (Telephone and Fax Numbers) Check the Appropriate Box [ ] Please register me for the symposium; payment is enclosed; make checks payable to CFOG.* [ ] Please send me further information about the symposium. [ ] I cannot attend, but would like to obtain symposium publications and/or tapes recordings. *The registration fee is $350 (U.S.) and must be enclosed with this form to confirm your registration. The fee covers attendance at the symposium, all printed publications and the cost of two breakfasts, one lunch and one reception (cash bar) and dinner. Full refunds will be made for cancellations received before October 25, 1995. A service charge of $50 (U.S.) will be assessed for any cancellation made between October 25, 1995 and November 2, 1995. No refunds can be made thereafter. The Aetna Conference Center has a number of comfortable and convenient rooms available at reasonable rates. If you are interested in booking a room at the conference center, please call Pam Sakow at (203) 236-6034. ------------------------------ End of PRIVACY Forum Digest 04.15 ************************
Vortex Technology Home Page
Copyright © 2005 Vortex Technology. All Rights Reserved.