Consumer Watchdog recently praised European data protection authorities for asking Google to delay implementation of its new privacy and data policies and said the U.S. Federal Trade Commission should determine whether the new policies violate the terms of Google’s consent agreement with the commission.

Under the new policies, announced by Google last week, the Internet giant would combine data from different services that it had kept separate in the past.

“Google is making a huge change that weakens your privacy protection,” said John M. Simpson, Director of Consumer Watchdog’s Privacy Project. “I am glad the Europeans have taken the lead on this, but now it’s imperative that the FTC determine if Google has violated its consent agreement. I think they have. Google is using your data in a new way and not making the change on an opt-in basis as the consent agreement requires.”

Jacob Kohnstamm, chairman of the Article 29 Working Party, an association of the data commissioners from the European Union, wrote Google CEO Larry Page seeking the delay in implementing the policies, due to go into effect March 1.

“Given the wide range of services you offer, and popularity of these services, changes in your privacy policy may affect many citizens in most or all of the EU member states,” wrote Kohnstamm. “We wish to check the possible consequences for the protection of the personal data of these citizens in a coordinated procedure.”

He said the French data protection authority, the CNIL, would take the lead in the analysis. Google’s consent agreement with the FTC came as a result of the “Buzz” debacle in which the Internet giant displayed users’ email addresses without their consent as it tried to launch a social network. Under the terms of the agreement, Google can’t use data it has collected in new ways unless users opt in to the new use.

Image Courtesy of   http://www.flickr.com/photos/copyfraud/

The article Consumer Watchdog Laud’s European Action on Google Policy appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Consumer Watchdog called on President Obama to use the State of the Union message to endorse baseline privacy legislation and support “Do Not Track” regulations that would give consumers control of whether their information is gathered while they use the Internet.

“You recently expressed your commitment to maintaining freedom of expression on the Internet. Consumer Watchdog shares that commitment. Just as important, however, is protecting online privacy. Indeed, without adequate privacy protection freedom of expression ultimately is undermined,” wrote John M. Simpson, director of Consumer Watchdog’s Privacy Project.

The open letter to the president continued:

“When you, your wife or your children go online you are all tracked, usually without your knowledge and consent. What you and other people click on, purchase, or share with others is compiled, analyzed and used to build a profile.

The online data gathered about people is often used to target advertising, but can also be used to make assumptions about them in connection with employment, housing, insurance, and financial services; for purposes of lawsuits against individuals; and for government surveillance.

At the moment there are no state or federal limits on what information can be collected, with whom it can be shared, how long it can be retained or how it can be used. Unlike most other countries, there is no baseline privacy law in the United States. People have virtually no meaningful way to control how data about them is gathered or used…”

“As you know, both the Commerce Department and the Federal Trade Commission will soon issue reports recommending online privacy policies. Industry is lobbying to make these proposals as ineffective as possible, but people should have meaningful privacy protections. I urge you to use the State of the Union message as a vehicle to call for privacy legislation based on the Fair Information Practices principles and that would also provide for a so-called ‘Do Not Track’ mechanism.”

A “Do Not Track” mechanism is a method that allows a computer user to send a clear, unambiguous message that one’s online activities should not be tracked, Consumer Watchdog said. There are a number of ways this could be accomplished. In fact the “Do Not Track” concept is technology neutral.

It is any method that sends the message to Websites a consumer visits that one’s activities should not be tracked. Simply put, “Do Not Track” is like posting a “No Trespassing” sign on your property. Legislation is necessary so the “Do Not Track” message is honored, the nonprofit public interest group said.

The letter continued:

“Giving Americans a visible, uncomplicated choice to stop Internet companies from tracking us online will not end online advertising, but it will force advertisers to respect our personal boundaries. If that means fewer targeted sales of Viagra or shady mortgage refinance schemes, so be it.

“The ‘Do Not Track Me’ movement is so important because it sets the principle and precedent of the first real governmental limits on the Wild West of Internet data mining. It establishes our right to be online without being tracked and makes clear the Internet has become a necessity of life that government must protect.

“Privacy violations are not victimless. Identity theft has run rampant because so much of our personal information is available in so many places. Teenagers are particularly at risk because they tend to share too much information online. And our jobs, familial relationships and friendships can be jeopardized if information about our medical condition, sexual preferences or lifestyle choices is evident and available to anyone who can see the advertisements on our computer screens.”

Consumers are uncomfortable with online tracking and targeting, Consumer Watchdog said. A poll conducted by Grove Insight for Consumer Watchdog in July 2010 revealed that 90 percent of Americans wanted more laws to protect online privacy, 86 percent favored the creation of an “anonymous button” that allows individuals to stop anyone from tracking their online searches or purchase, and 80 percent wanted a “Do Not Track Me” feature for online companies that would be administered by the Federal Trade Commission.

“A ‘Do Not Track’ mechanism would give consumers better control of their information and help restore their confidence in the Internet. That’s a win-win for consumers and business. I urge you to endorse privacy legislation and ‘Do Not Track’ during the State of The Union message,” Simpson concluded.

Randall Stevens / Shutterstock.com

The article Consumer Watchdog Calls For President Obama to Endorse “Do Not Track” appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Health insurance premiums for California families rose 153% since 2002, more than five times the 29% increase in the rate of inflation, according to a new survey released recently.

“A 153% increase in health insurance premiums in just 10 years is unbearable, and the fact that premiums have risen five times the rate of inflation is scandalous,” said Carmen Balber of Consumer Watchdog, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization. “Californians are paying for 7-digit executive salaries, insurance company waste, and excessive profits with these sky-high premiums. Insurers should have to prove why they want rate hikes in public, and Californians should have the power to block rate increases that can’t be justified.”

The survey was conducted by the California HealthCare Foundation.

In November, Consumer Watchdog filed a ballot initiative that would require health insurance companies to publicly justify and get rates approved before they take effect. Health insurance companies in California may currently raise rates to any level with no approval. No one has the power to block a rate hike, even if it is found to be unreasonable or excessive. The ballot initiative gives the state insurance commissioner the power to reject excessive or unreasonable rates.

The CHCF survey found that annual premiums were higher in California than nationally for individual coverage ($5,970 versus $5,429) and family coverage ($15,724 versus $15,073). Thirty-five states have some authority to approve or reject health insurance rate increases, while California has none.

The proposed ballot initiative, known as the “Insurance Rate Public Justification and Accountability Act,” would:

• Require health insurance companies to open their books and justify, under penalty of perjury, proposed rate changes before taking effect.
• Require public hearings and approval by the Insurance Commissioner before health insurance company rate increases can take effect.
• Prohibit health insurance, auto insurance, and home insurance companies from charging based on prior insurance history or credit score.

The initiative also requires insurance companies to justify rates in relation to proposed changes to patient out-of-pocket expenses, including deductibles and co-pays. The CHCF survey found that copayments for office visits increased substantially since 2007, the number of workers in small firms with high deductibles more than tripled since 2006, and annual out-of-pocket limits grew significantly since 2005.

The measure will be cleared to circulate for signature-gathering this month.

The article CA Health Insurance Premiums Increased Five Times Faster Than Inflation appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.