AFFIRMATIVE — COUNTERPLAN — STATES/FEDERALISM — ANSWERS 41
STATE BY STATE APPROACH WILL DESTROY E-COMMERCE
RELYING ON A STATE BY STATE SCHEME WILL DESTROY NATIONAL MARKETING EFFORTS
JAMES HECKMAN, Staff Writer, Marketing News TM, November 22, 1999; Pg. 4 TITLE: (Marketers don't) love N.Y. . . . or California; California, New York lead pack in creating privacy regulations // acs-VT2001
"Many of the state law efforts are similar to federal ones (already passed or under consideration), but each would have specific state requirements in addition to what the federal laws say," says Jeffrey Edelstein, a partner with Hall Dickler Kent Friedman & Wood, a New York-based law firm specializing in advertising and marketing law. "It makes it more difficult for national marketers to engage in national campaigns. Now, you really have to go to specialized legal counsel," and that can be expensive.
ALLOWING STATE LAWS TO BE MORE STRINGENT THAN FEDRAL CREATES 51 DIFFERENT PRIVACY REGIMES, AND MULTIPLIES THE RISK OF COURT SUITS
Modern Healthcare, April 10, 2000, SECTION: Pg. 70 TITLE: Unnecessarily complex // acs-EE2001
Both patient-privacy advocates and the healthcare industry have urged a uniform national standard for federal, state and private civil actions to protect electronic records. Instead, HHS proposes to pre-empt only those provisions of state laws that are less stringent than the federal regulations. This patchwork arrangement--providing, in effect, 51 privacy standards instead of a uniform national standard--is something only a class-action plaintiff's lawyer could love. The potential for private civil actions multiplies if, as expected, the HHS regulations are interpreted to be enforceable through whistleblower complaints under the False Claims Act.
COMPLYING WITH A PATCHWORK OF STATE LAWS WILL RUIN E-COMMERCE COMPANIES
Rebecca Christie, Financial Times (London), July 28, 1999, SECTION: THE AMERICAS; Pg. 06 TITLE: Delay in internet privacy law urged // acs-EE2001
But Ms Anthony [FTC Commissioner Sheila Anthony ] said companies could incur more expenses by trying to meet privacy standards that varied from state to state. Also, more than 80 per cent of internet users had concerns about online privacy, she said, and privacy policies posted online often were not carried out. "The self-regulatory environment has not advanced the ball as far as I would have expected," she said. "I respectfully disagree with my colleagues in that I believe the time is ripe to for Congress to enact federal legislation to protect online consumer policy."
STATE CONSUMER CONTROLS WOULD HAMPER INTER-STATE BUSINESSES
THE ARIZONA REPUBLIC January 20, 2000 SECTION: FRONT; Pg. A2 TITLE: STATES MOVING TOWARD MORE PRIVACY PROTECTION // acs-EE2001
The most far-reaching state actions are opposed by business groups. They particularly object to proposals that would prohibit sharing information unless consumers first give permission.
"It would be disastrous to our industry," says John Byrne, senior counsel for the American Bankers Association.
He likens it to politicians being told they cannot seek a campaign donation from anyone who has not volunteered to be solicited.
"People wouldn't take the time to opt in," he says.
DIFFERING STATE LAWS WILL CHOKE E-BUSINESSES IN LITIGATION AND RED TAPE
Business Week, March 20, 2000 SECTION: COVER STORY; ONLINE PRIVACY; Number 3673; Pg. 82 TITLE: It's Time for Rules in Wonderland // acs-VT2001
Responding to a growing chorus of privacy-related complaints, some states have drafted legislation ranging from curtailing the sale of personal information to the creation of a privacy ombudsman. But this piecemeal, state-by-state approach is a muddle. Scattershot laws will only create more confusion. Over time, they will choke budding e-business in complex litigation and red tape.
INTERNET COMPANIES WANT BROAD FEDERAL PRIVACY REGULATIONS BECAUSE THEY WILL BE CLEAR AND UNIFORM
Business Week, March 20, 2000 SECTION: COVER STORY; ONLINE PRIVACY; Number 3673; Pg. 82 TITLE: It's Time for Rules in Wonderland // acs-VT2001
Because privacy breaches are so corrosive to consumer trust, some Web execs actually welcome broad national standards. IBM and Walt Disney Co. have decided not to advertise on Web sites that don't have privacy policies. Privacy codes must be clearer, says Chris Larsen, CEO and founder of E-Loan Inc., an online loan service that has its privacy policies audited. ''I think the industry has squandered the opportunity to take care of this on its own.'' IBM Chairman Louis Gerstner doesn't go that far. But he has warned Net executives that they must get serious. ''I am troubled, very troubled, by leaders who have failed to recognize our responsibility in the transformation of the new economy,'' he says.
ONE FEDERAL LAW WILL BE BETTER FOR BUSINESSES ON THE NET THAN MANY DIFFERENT STATE LAWS
Business Week, March 20, 2000 SECTION: COVER STORY; ONLINE PRIVACY; Number 3673; Pg. 82 TITLE: It's Time for Rules in Wonderland // acs-VT2001
FEDERAL STANDARD. In the long term, the privacy protection that BUSINESS WEEK espouses will make life simpler for businesses on the Net. More than 20 states already are moving to enact some kind of guarantees. A minimum federal standard of online privacy would decrease the cost and complexity for companies. It also would increase trust. If businesses really want to be close to their customers, trust is paramount. This approach also will shrink the gap that has arisen between the U.S. and Europe, where privacy already is recognized as a right. The Europeans have stood firm, putting American companies in the peculiar position of extending greater privacy protection in Germany or France than at home.