Instant messaging --> now what?

[Peter L. Peres]

On Wed, 1 Oct 2003, Peter L. Peres wrote:

> On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Keith Mastin wrote:
> >
> > > What legal issue ? Whose privacy ? I respect your opinion, but by this
> > > logic talking privately on the corridor of a downtown mall during lunch
> > > break would make the mall owners responsible for the content of the
> > > discussion, and mandate them to record it so they can cover themselves
> > > in case something happens as a result of that discussion. The next step
> > > would be the interdiction of congregation, which is not unknown under
> > > martial rule. You would like to impose both of these things, without
> > > martial law ? Come on.
> >
> > The FTC (?) stateside just made it a law to secure any personal customer
> > or client data stored on publically accessible servers. This came down on
> > sept 29, so it might be related somehow.
>
> Now you lost me. What is the sense of the word 'secure' and what is a
> 'publically accessible server' in the sense used above ? I am not
> nitpicking, I am too stunned to react yet. Any pointers on what this
> FTC action is/called ?

Wait, I think I understand. The FTC (or FCC ?) want any personal (as in
nominally referring to or about a person) data secured (encrypted or
otherwise removed from the reach of possible fraudulent use). Is this more
or less the idea ? And now everyone is puzzling over whether IM messages
in transit over a server are personal data and how this FUD can be best
used against open source/open internet groups and advocates ?

Peter
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml