The Pros And Cons Of Internet Privacy

Ever feel like you are being watched? How about having the feeling like some one is following you home from school? Well that is what it will be like if users do not have the privacy on the Internet they deserve. EPIC (Electronic Privacy Information Center), a advocacy group that has been fighting the Clinton Administration for tougher online consumer protection laws, and other privacy protection agencies have formed to protect the rights and privileges of the Internet user. With the U.S. Government, EPIC has had to step in and help small companies and Internet users with their own privacy problems, hackers getting into their systems and ruining the networks, and crackers stealing and decrypting private

In today’s world, Privacy and Security comes hand in hand with internet. Technology allows us free speech and freedom of information over the internet, by imposing strict laws and policies regulating the privacy and security of our information. According to Richard Clarke, free expression over the internet and its privacy are two sides of the same coin (Privacy and security(n.d.)). Writing blogs, uploading posts, comments or pictures on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, networking or sharing links on Linkedin are all considered as our free expression and its security is our right. Individual right to

Essentially allowing anyone’s personal and sensitive online information to be sold to the highest bidder, which is not only immoral and unethical but a violation of the Constitution."Even in a society without unjust differences of power and wealth, there would still be things that money should not buy." Michael J. Sandel warns in his book, What Money Can't Buy. Selling people’s internet privacy is not equal to ticket scalping, there must be market limits, privacy must not be sold to companies such as Comcast or Verizon merely for making a profit. Consequently, with 88.5% of the American population using the internet, if the FCC’s rules should be repealed, it would create widespread pandemonium throughout America. Pandemonium such as widespread corruption or major riots on capitol hill. Moreover, there is no gain for American citizens with repealing the FCC’s rules; the house of representatives must vote against it. The FCC must stand and must be able to make new rules to protect American’s internet privacy and we must not treat internet privacy as a

With the expansion of digital and online marketplaces, the FCC’s responsibility to promote free market principles and business has never been more important. The order goes on to describe how it will use its’ legal authority to promote free market expansion, “We marshal all of these sources of authority toward a common statutorily-supported goal: to protect and promote Internet openness as platform for competition, free expression and innovation; a driver of economic growth; and an engine of the virtuous cycle of broadband deployment” (FCC, 120). By promoting open internet and the virtuous cycle, business and digital marketplaces have a secure and reliable medium to buy and sell goods, and promote business and other start-ups. The commission’s legal authority is derived from section 706 (FCC, 121). The order also aims at modernizing Title II, an act that helps promote investment and business activity (FCC,

Federal Communications Commission, otherwise known as the FCC, voted two-to-one in May of 2017, to begin the tearing down of the net neutrality law (Rushe), that which protected individuals from companies that purposefully slowed down service lanes so as to regulate what was being broadcasted across computers. Chief internet official Ajit Pai at the FCC stated that he believed that the dismantling of the net neutrality laws could pave the way for a more competitive marketplace, that which would “lift ‘heavy-handed’ internet regulations that overly restricted internet providers” (White). The repealing of net neutrality seems to mainly garner approval from big companies, such as Verizon, and more recently, Comcast, companies that would do well by the repealing of such a law. With net neutrality gone companies such as those listed above would be able to, legally, regulate and control what people saw on the internet by slowing down or speeding up lanes depending on the affiliation the company has with that specific website (Finley). However, even with Title II in effect, some companies have found a way to circumvent those rules in order to ‘play favorites’ as it were. For instance, when AT&T customers access the Direct TV’s streaming service they may find that the data extrapolated from the service used did not count towards their current data limit’s (Finley). It is also believed that with no regulations in place regarding net neutrality, companies have the potential of becoming dictators and blocking

This article talks about online privacy. When former president, Obama was in office he helped put in place internet privacy protection. President Trump signed a congressional resolution Monday overturning internet privacy protection. This allows broadband providers to get more information from consumers without having to get permission from Congress. The article states that this is a repeal but is not a replacement.

The FCC’s move will allow companies like Comcast, AT&T and Verizon to charge internet companies for speedier access to consumers and to block outside services they don’t like. The change also axes a host of consumer protections, including privacy requirements and rules barring unfair practices that gave consumers an avenue to pursue complaints about price gouging.

They would think this due to a recent legal decision made by the Supreme Court when Comcast sued the Federal Communications Committee. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit found that the FCC lacks the power to stop Comcast from slowing traffic to popular file sharing sites (Gilroy, 2009). This decision essentially removes the government enforcer that otherwise prevents a company like Comcast from blocking popular sites like Hulu or Youtube (Kang, 2010). However, President Obama has brought attention to this issue by expressing his idea that the treatment of the Internet should be viewed as a public utility. If the Internet is classified as a public utility and Internet service providers only provide the necessary tools and equipment to access this utility then the FCC will gain much more regulatory control over these mega corporations. The Commander in Chief’s statement rejects the proposed FCC rules made earlier this year and calls for a proposal of no-paid prioritization, no blocking of content that is not illegal, and no throttling of Internet services (Bennett,

Net neutrality is a principle that has defended American citizens from internet service providers such as AT&T and Verizon from corrupting individuals internet access. For instance, the principle prevents the speeding up, slowing down or the blockage of any content in applications or websites and charging customers extra fees for high-speed internet. However, that principle is currently being discussed by the F.C.C. whether to repeal Net Neutrality or continue with the principle. The F.C.C. chairman, Ajit Pai proposed the idea and while big internet services such as the ones mentioned agree with the removal of net neutrality since it will give them more leverage over the income they will receive. Yet, others such as Google, Facebook and Amazon

We have all experienced it. The tingles down your spine while your sixth sense picks up someone’s harsh eyes scanning you. You are being watched. As the little hairs stand up on your neck and the chill of judgment floods your body, you choke on the insecurity that comes over you. Some break out in a nervous sweat and drown themselves in doubt; others do not hesitate to send beams of criticism back. Many stare with innocent intentions while others purposely hope to provoke anxiety. However, if you did not know that someone’s cruel eyes were on you, would it be just as bothersome? Since 2000, internet security has been an issue that many feel is a violation of their privacy. This controversial topic has hit almost all newspapers with

The words, “Arguing that you don’t care about privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say” were said by Edward Snowden who is a computer professional in America. Similarly, the essays “Tracking Is an Assault on Liberty,” “Web Users Get as Much as They Give,” and “Facebook Is Using You” from Nicholas Carr, Jim Harper, and Lori Andrews respectively points out that the internet privacy is good and bad. However, the articles by Carr and Andrews are based on the negative side of the internet privacy, which means that the internet privacy is not good. On the other hand, Harper’s article is based on the positive side of the internet privacy, which means that the internet privacy is good and scary, but people need to be careful of their own information and browsing histories, and websites. Jim Harper’s essay is more relevant and reasonable than the Nicholas Carr and Lori Andrews’s essays. However, Harper seems more persuasive to readers because he believes that the internet is good if people use it in a right way, whereas Carr and Andrews believe that the internet is not good at all.

The concern about privacy on the Internet is increasingly becoming an issue of international dispute. ?Citizens are becoming concerned that the most intimate details of their daily lives are being monitored, searched and recorded.? (www.britannica.com) 81% of Net users are concerned about threats to their privacy while online. The greatest threat to privacy comes from the construction of e-commerce alone, and not from state agents. E-commerce is structured on the copy and trade of intimate personal information and therefore, a threat to privacy on the Internet.

"The Constitution was written in very general language, which has resulted in ambiguity about where national power and authority end and state power and authority begin" (Fine, 2016). In other words, American Federalism, a system of government where people distribute power between national and state governments. The constitution gives each government their own power, but they also share some power and responsibilities. All people living in the United States have the right to privacy. The privacy of American citizens was a Supreme Court decision, which over the years has established that the right to privacy is a basic human right. The right to privacy is often protected by certain laws. For example, the Health Information Portability and Accountability Act that protects the health information of individuals, The Privacy of Children on the Internet, The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, the Federal Trade Commission that enforces the right to privacy in several ways and many other laws that help citizens maintain their rights to privacy. These are some of the national and state policy that would help me explain the advantages and disadvantages of the privacy laws.

Internet privacy is the security of a user’s personal data that is stored or published on the internet. The internet is an important part of every individual’s daily life. In today’s society, the internet is used by many different people for many reasons. It can be used for research, communication, and purchasing items. Without the internet, many things that are completed during the course of a day would be impossible or take time to complete. As people use the internet, everything is stored in a database that tracks and keeps any personal information that is entered by users. As users continue to use the internet to complete important tasks such as purchasing items and paying bills, their privacy and security become at risk. Although the internet can be seen to have a positive impact on society, it does have a negative impact. Since the internet can be accessed by anybody it can cause a lot of damage. Examples of internet risk include identity thieves, phasing, and scams. Due to things such as online shopping, banking and other e-commerce options, personal information is stored in the internet enabling many cybercrimes to occur. Cybercrimes are very similar to any regular crime; the crime just happens to take place on websites for criminals to hack and steal user’s information for their own personal benefit. Cybercriminals tend to attack users based on their emails, social media accounts, and web history because the most history about an individual is stored in those sites.

Internet anonymity exists in various forms of “relationally functional internet anonymity” (Teo and Oksanen 1). As Teo Keipi and Atte Oksanen mentioned in their academic journal, self-exploration, anonymity and risks in the online setting, as well as the levels of the different relationally functional internet anonymity is not mutually exclusive and they should be “referred to as tendencies and gages” and not that of “set rules” (1). For the purposes of this paper, all forms of anonymity, as defined by Teo and Oksanen (Full, Pseudonimity, Visual and Face-to-face) (3) will be analysed.