<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Comments on HB 5502, the &#8220;INFORM&#8221; Act	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2021/11/comments-on-hb-5502-the-inform-act.htm/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2021/11/comments-on-hb-5502-the-inform-act.htm</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Nov 2021 18:08:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Eric Goldman		</title>
		<link>https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2021/11/comments-on-hb-5502-the-inform-act.htm#comment-3164</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Eric Goldman]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Nov 2021 18:08:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://blog.ericgoldman.org/?p=23265#comment-3164</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2021/11/comments-on-hb-5502-the-inform-act.htm#comment-3163&quot;&gt;Brad Summers&lt;/a&gt;.

When you ask the Q &quot;do companies have privacy rights?,&quot; then no, you aren&#039;t missing anything. But I don&#039;t think that&#039;s the right question. Companies are just collections of people, and those individuals have privacy rights that do deserve consideration. Imagine, for example, a employee&#039;s address being available to a stalker, or a famous CEO&#039;s email address being published to the world, or critics seeking to intimidate a business&#039; owner because of the owner&#039;s political position or demographical attributes. Also, as we say from the Sony hack by North Korea, baring a company&#039;s secrets publicly can have life-changing effects for the people whose information gets shared. Obviously I&#039;m picking extreme examples that may involve more data than is at issue in this bill, but I hope it shows what I think is the right questions that Congress ought to be considering.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2021/11/comments-on-hb-5502-the-inform-act.htm#comment-3163">Brad Summers</a>.</p>
<p>When you ask the Q &#8220;do companies have privacy rights?,&#8221; then no, you aren&#8217;t missing anything. But I don&#8217;t think that&#8217;s the right question. Companies are just collections of people, and those individuals have privacy rights that do deserve consideration. Imagine, for example, a employee&#8217;s address being available to a stalker, or a famous CEO&#8217;s email address being published to the world, or critics seeking to intimidate a business&#8217; owner because of the owner&#8217;s political position or demographical attributes. Also, as we say from the Sony hack by North Korea, baring a company&#8217;s secrets publicly can have life-changing effects for the people whose information gets shared. Obviously I&#8217;m picking extreme examples that may involve more data than is at issue in this bill, but I hope it shows what I think is the right questions that Congress ought to be considering.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Brad Summers		</title>
		<link>https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2021/11/comments-on-hb-5502-the-inform-act.htm#comment-3163</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Brad Summers]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Nov 2021 15:56:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://blog.ericgoldman.org/?p=23265#comment-3163</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I understand the privacy argument w/r/t individuals that are &quot;high-volume-sellers&quot;, but that raises two questions:  (1) how many individuals would fall in that category (i.e. is this really a common situation that couldn&#039;t be fixed by tweaking the boundaries), and (2) if the entity isn&#039;t an individual, why should I care about it&#039;s privacy?  Allowing a corporate entity to shield it&#039;s own identity (as opposed to the identities of its owners) seems to run counter to the basic social bargain that argued for corporate entities in the first place. ***honest question, not a troll*** Is there some obvious argument for corporate entity privacy rights I&#039;m missing?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I understand the privacy argument w/r/t individuals that are &#8220;high-volume-sellers&#8221;, but that raises two questions:  (1) how many individuals would fall in that category (i.e. is this really a common situation that couldn&#8217;t be fixed by tweaking the boundaries), and (2) if the entity isn&#8217;t an individual, why should I care about it&#8217;s privacy?  Allowing a corporate entity to shield it&#8217;s own identity (as opposed to the identities of its owners) seems to run counter to the basic social bargain that argued for corporate entities in the first place. ***honest question, not a troll*** Is there some obvious argument for corporate entity privacy rights I&#8217;m missing?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Carole Aubert		</title>
		<link>https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2021/11/comments-on-hb-5502-the-inform-act.htm#comment-3162</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Carole Aubert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Nov 2021 15:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://blog.ericgoldman.org/?p=23265#comment-3162</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Interesting because the fulfillment of the condition of &quot;high-volume seller” will always be &quot;a posteriori&quot;  ? and the check about the identify of the seller as well ? Because at the time of registration, no one knows if the seller will reach the threshold... and savvy sellers who infringe the law (Typically IP infringements..) will create several different accounts in order not to reach these thresholds...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting because the fulfillment of the condition of &#8220;high-volume seller” will always be &#8220;a posteriori&#8221;  ? and the check about the identify of the seller as well ? Because at the time of registration, no one knows if the seller will reach the threshold&#8230; and savvy sellers who infringe the law (Typically IP infringements..) will create several different accounts in order not to reach these thresholds&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
