Monitoring the Internet has been a controversial issue regarding who should have access to the Internet, what is being put up, and what is being blocked. Some believe the Internet is a human right, while others believe it is a privilege and should be monitored by the government and businesses for their employees. There are both benefits as wells as negatives regarding whether the Internet should be monitored at all, if so, who monitors the internet and what rules are implemented. The Internet has allowed people to express ideas and communicate with each other around the world. Those that are against the government’s interference and monitoring of the Internet believe that they are entitled to privacy and the freedom of self-expression.
Safety is a big concern among the American people, so if the government says they are doing something to protect them, people will believe it, even if the government is stretching the truth. The only thing that the constitution directly states about privacy is against unwarranted search and seizure, which kind of counters the Patriot’s Act. (#5) The patriot act does allow the NSA to search your laptop, phone, o... ... middle of paper ... ... something like that into the terms and conditions, But the concern for more privacy laws is approaching. A certain law may exist in the future that does not allow companies to put anything they want in the agreement. Most big corporations probably wouldn’t want to do that anyway, because people will not buy into it when the word spreads.
Internet privacy law becomes important in this case as by using the internet privacy; he can restrict the other people to see its personal information and data. So the basic purpose of the internet privacy laws is to keep the information and data away from the reach of those people which are not related to them because it can be dangerous as well. h Internet privacy law is a necessary tool that is used by all the multinational companies to keep the data of their customers to themselves only and did not want to give it to anyone. For example, a large telecom company might have thousands of customers and the company has the personal data of each and every customer separately but a person which is not a member of the company cannot see the data because the company has made it available to the specific person which are the repres... ... middle of paper ... ...ue to the internet privacy laws. As the cases of the theft and online is increasing day by day, there is a great need of the internet privacy law.
Therefore, they have no need to worry about what they post, because businesses or colleges have no way of viewing their profile. The oppositions point is not wrong, but it also is not all correct. Privacy settings are available for Facebook and Myspace users to allow them to limit what can be seen by the public. It is not possible to hide everything one may have on their profile. Danah Boyd, an anthropologist and social – networking expert at the University of California, Berkeley, argued that “Information is not private because no one k... ... middle of paper ... ...hat they are safe because of the privacy settings they have set.
As can be seen, from the information presented, the need for laws and restrictions concerning internet data collection is greatly needed. Moreover, the government can search private citizens data without warrant or cause. Also, companies are not only collecting internet user data but also selling it. The companies and agencies who commit such crimes should be fined or either closed down. In closing, the privacy and security of individuals on the internet should be upheld by the United States government.
You might want to protect yourself against an oppressive government, or post personal messages to a Usenet newsgroup without identifying yourself to the whole world as the poster. Although everyone takes privacy in normal life for granted, trying to get the same level of privacy on the Internet (or even on your own computer) is a little less accepted, and sometimes a bit more complicated. While the general attitude is hard to change, many ways exist to enhance your privacy online. For the most part, total privacy does not exist on the Internet. It is nearly impossible to erase all of your digital footprints.
The police have to obtain a search warrant; they get a search warrant by having probable cause and show proof that a crime is being committed. We have the right to “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” The government cannot take away or limit our enumerated rights (2nd). The right to privacy is the most comprehensible and the most valued by citizens. People like to be private, and most of the time they get angry or upset when their privacy is invaded, even though they put most of their information and business on social networks. This is weird to me because they like to be private but they still post all of their information on social websites, it is kind of contradictory.
Internet security is important to protect our privacy, protect us from fraud, and from viruses that could destroy a piece of our technology. Internet privacy and security may be different but share a responsibility, but it is up to us to take personal responsibility to protect ourselves on the internet. We should pick unique, carful passwords, and never share this sensitive information, and encrypt our data when online. When it comes to social media, I found this information that explains it well. (Endangering their right to privacy 2010) states “Communications and personal information that are posted online are usually accessible to a vast number of people.
Big vendors such as Amazon would want to secure their network infrastructure to protect the users information, so that their server would not be hacked. However, even this style of protecting personal information is not enough. The users demand further protection such as ensuring their information is not being sold to other vendors for misuse, or spam the users mailbox with soliticing. Pri... ... middle of paper ... .... Soukup, Paul, Ethics@Email, http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v8n2/email.html Hinds, Sara, Is your life an open book?, http://www.consumer-action.org/English/CANews/2001_July_Privacy.php#Topic_06 Sherry, Linda, Web aggregators: questions about privacy and liability, http://www.consumer-action.org/English/CANews/2001_July_Privacy.php#Topic_07 Same as 6 PLPR's World-Wide Privacy Guide, Privacy Protection Agencies, http://austlii.edu.au/~graham/PLPR_world_wide_guide.html#agencies The Australian Privacy Charter, http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/CyberLRes/1995/smart/54.html Privacy Knowledge Base, http://www.privacyknowledgebase.com/document.jsp?docid=REFDPMEA&isInt=INT Same as 10. EbusinessForum.com, VietNam: Law and Regulations, http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?
To conclude with, the “right to be forgotten” is a right that people think of has a something that they must have been garneted the “right of freedom or the right to bear arms”. However, that does not apply to everyone like criminals, politicians and everyday people who all posts things on the internet or someone during for them. I think that the right to be forgotten is not for those kind of people. However, the “right to be forgotten” is just an unnecessary tool to be used if people make mistakes on the internet and can start over with the things that they post on the