Location & Privacy: Where Are We Headed?

Speakers:
Laura Berger, Attorney, Division of Privacy and Identity Protection, Federal Trade Commission
Jim Dempsey, Vice President for Public Policy, Center for Democracy & Technology
Brian Knapp, Chief Operating Officer, Loopt
Brendon Lynch, Chief Privacy Officer, Microsoft
Owen Tripp, Co-founder & Chief Operating Officer, Reputation.com

Moderator: Melissa Parrish, Research Analyst, Forrester Research

Location-based technologies such as Facebook Places, Foursquare, Twitter, Loopt, mobile search, GPS services and others are innovative and transformative, with huge potential benefits for both consumers and businesses. These and other new technologies and services that track, analyze, and share our movements in the public sphere are already woven into our everyday existence.

As use of location-aware tools increase around the globe, what are the privacy implications for users? Will consumers be expected to take responsibility for their own locational privacy and reputation? What role will the government play in protecting consumer privacy, without severely hampering the economic potential of this market? What privacy-enhancing technologies are emerging that will enable consumers to choose how their personal information is shared?

Sponsor: Microsoft

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• privacy
• location
• churchill club
• microsoft
• ftc
• CDT
• Loopt
• Reputation.com
• Laura Berger
• Jim Dempsey
• Brian Knapp
• Brendon Lynch
• Owen Tripp
• Melissa Parrish
• Forrester Research
• networking
• Silicon Valley
• California
• Bay Area
• forum
• technology
• event
• San Francisco

[jorgesantoine24]

The only defence I can see against abuse of technology and unwarranted accumulation of knowledge about all of us is for citizens as a whole to remain alert and reject all attempts by goverment and the corporations to make taboo and / or criminalise behaviours, which they have an innate tendency towards doing in their pursuit of greater wealth, control and power.

[jorgesantoine24]

No data should be passed to the goverment under any circumstances without a fully substantiated warrant authorised by a public jury. I do not need protecting from paedophiles, online stalkers, hackers, or al Qaeda, and accessing data by using them as a justification constitutes a far greater threat than any of them. If data is not secure from hackers, then the ISPs, MSNs, Yahoos, and Googles of this world are providing products that are not fit for purpose, and they need to fix them.

[jorgesantoine24]

Personal liberty is more important than all the jobs in the Valley and around the world as well. So that argument holds no water either. I don't want to be contacted by third party companies, or companies I have not given specific and obvious instuction to do so. Likewise, I do not want any data about me stored, passed on, sold, or analysed in any way which is not directly necessary to provide whatever service I am engaged in using. Once my use of the service is over, data should be deleted.

[jorgesantoine24]

I only recently got a phone with a GPS so haven't got into using location based applications yet, but they are certainly the most concerning yet. I don't like the government having the ability to track my movements and know what I'm doing based on my browsing and messaging, etc. Anybody willing to defend the accumulation of that kind of data by any body, corporate or government, has no understanding of how knowledge is power and how power corrupts, or they have a vested interest.

[jorgesantoine24]

As for educating users about what they are giving their 'consent' to, this may be possible to some extent for some users, but, since most people have trouble remembering how to programme their in the old days video recorders now Tivo or whatever, education as a solution is also pretty much hogwash too.

[jorgesantoine24]

This is a redundant conversation because the corporations own the government and will never allow regulations to be passed limiting their business. The people on this panel are just creating the illusion that their is some concern, awareness, and attempt to control abuses of privacy when in fact there is none. Thier role is really just to provide reasurance to the public to facilitate the abuses of privacy which will come as soon as the cloud is fully in place and utilised.