posted on September 2, 2000 10:05:06 AM new
<P>http://cnnfn.cnn.com/2000/09/01/technology/wires/amazon_wg/
"Seattle-based Amazon.com which sells products ranging from books to toys to hardware on its site, has posted a revised privacy policy telling customers the information they give is considered a saleable asset."
""As we continue to develop our business, we might sell or buy storesor assets. In such transactions, customer information generally is one of the transferred business assets," ...
posted on September 2, 2000 11:44:14 AM new
So what?
For hundreds of years of business history this has been the TRADITIONAL practice.
Imagine, if you will, back in the past one company buiys another. Inside of that company is a large dusty file cabinet. Inside that file cabinet is the company sales and customer lists. These are traditionally included in the sale. Customer lists, sales leads, and other sales info. Alway, always, always included in the sale.
posted on September 3, 2000 08:49:16 AM new
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So what?
For hundreds of years of business history this has been the TRADITIONAL practice
---------------------------------------------
So what? This is NOT 20 years ago, now these companies reach MILLIONS of people with a mouse click. As a seller OR bidder on auction sites, would you like a site that claims that they're quote "only a venue" unquote to sell your sales history, including amounts, bid history, including items, who paid what to whom and when, your credit card numbers, your address(es), phone #'s, what you post on a message board, your Internet browsing habits, etc., etc, AD INFINITUM? Do you like the fact that on many of these sites, Management has already been contacted by the IRS, and out-of-context information has been provided to them that customers have had to explain? You think that this is a TRADITIONAL situation? Sorry, not by a long shot.
posted on September 3, 2000 12:00:06 PM new
Your post proves your lack of knowledge about business.
I spent many many years in sales and marketing.
I used to keep extensive files on customers includiung dating habits, info on spouses, children, pets, etc. All to come across as a friendly kind of sales guy.
It is still just a customer list. A damn good customer list, compared to what I had in my role as a saleman. But still, it is just a customer list.
posted on September 3, 2000 12:58:34 PM new
Unbelievable, another ignorant, ad hominem poster heard from...
#1. If my post shows a lack of knowledge about ANYTHING, I have 78% of the American people who in a recent Harris Poll said that they would cut down drstically on their use of the Internet for business puproses if these personal data issues aren't addressed AND most of the members of both houses of Congress in my "lack of knowledge" corner, as there is at least one bill pending in Congress to protect people from greedy corporate use of personal data on my side.
But of course, you having been a "salesman" know better.
#2. Selling personal data past a certain point WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE PERSON has been successfully prosecuted by more than a few State Atty. Generals. This includes bogus use of credit card information, and telecommunications fraud, which occurs when telephone numbers are obtained in a bogus or underhanded fashion.
I could go on, but why don't you just go back to sleep. This is the Internet which reaches TENS OF MILLIONS of people, not a horse-drawn wagon with a snake oil salesman at the helm.
posted on September 3, 2000 02:41:28 PM new
Everyone,
Please remember to discuss the subject, not the individual. This is a requirement of the AuctionWatch Community Guidelines. Please keep them in mind as you post.
posted on September 3, 2000 09:29:26 PM new
FARRRRRR too many people here (and on every other discussion board on the Internet, for that matter) post OPINIONS, and when someone disagrees with them about those OPINIONS, they are on the trigger to make comments like "Oh, it's obvious you don't know anything about blah blah" BECAUSE someone disagrees with them... What the purpose for them of using a discussion board is I can't possibly fathom, because in point of fact they don't and perhaps CAN'T DISCUSS a thing, they don't "tolerate" disagreement with their positions, and they proceed to turn everything into a personal "I know but you don't" scenario. Now, I don't mind getting into discussions like that (I myself know a lot of things that others don't know), but I'd like to think that in the vast majority of cases I'm a wee too civilized to INITIATE them.
posted on September 6, 2000 05:51:55 PM new
Y'know, when I heard the news about Amazon doing this, I was all set to get fired up about it and cancel my Amazon accounts and all that.
But then I figured, why get upset about it? Number one, I will still buy stuff from Amazon when I need to, so why bother screwing up my account so I have to reenter all that information. And, no matter what I do or tell them to do with my information, they will do exactly what they want to do with it.
It just proves what I always say: There isn't a privacy policy anywhere on the internet that is worth the ether it is written in. If an internet site needs cash, their customers will help them get it, one way or another.
I figure I'll just go in and change the current email on my account to a hotmail addy (hopefully they will only be selling the current email address on the account) and let all the spam float over to that account...maybe check it once every two months to clean it out.
posted on September 6, 2000 06:47:02 PM new
My local newspaper had a very critical editorial about the Amazon policy, which is how I found out. I haven't used Amazon very much for purchases or auctions, but nevertheless I removed my credit card off the account. Also changed the e-mail to a sacrificial-lamb account. And, in reviewing the notification preferences, I had to re-UNcheck all the stuff, just to make sure. Amazon's posted policy looked innocent enough, but the potential for abuse is definitely there, especially if the company goes bankrupt (needing to liquidate salable assets) or is acquired at fire-sale prices by corporate scavengers hunting for "undervalued assets." The acquirer would not intend to operate the company (think back to the movie "Wall Street," but rather to sell off the parts for more than it paid.
In those scenarios you'd have third parties that would "own" the information, but with totally different intentions for it than the current Amazon.com. What rules of use would bind them?
We need LAWS -- and nothing less -- to protect privacy. This industry "self-regulation" won't do it.
posted on September 21, 2000 04:04:51 PM new
To anyone who's interested, especially to the "salesman" who posted earlier in this thread, here are some answers to "so what"-
---------------------------------------------
Privacy woes scaring off e-shoppers
With 61 percent of no-shows in the Internet check-out line citing privacy concerns and advocates making a stand, e-retailers' privacy practices are coming under fire -- again.
By Robert Lemos, ZDNet News
September 13, 2000 2:41 PM PT
WASHINGTON -- A national survey released at the Global Privacy Summit here Wednesday found that privacy concerns are having a significant impact on e-commerce.
Of the 800 people surveyed, more than 61 percent of the Internet users that don't shop online cite privacy and security concerns as the reason.
Users to Web sites: Protect my privacy
Like teenagers just discovering sex, Net surfers are afraid of the consequences, but clueless as to how to protect themselves, study suggests.
By Brock N. Meeks, MSNBC
August 20, 2000 3:56 PM PT
Most Internet users want a guarantee of privacy protections for their personal information and favor a requirement that mandates Internet companies seek their specific permission before disclosing that information to a third party. Those are the findings of a survey released Sunday by the Pew Internet & American Life project. However, a majority of those surveyed don't know what steps to take to protect their information, the survey found.
"Internet users want the 'Golden Rule' of the Internet to be: 'Don't do anything unto me unless I give you permission,'" said Lee Rainie, director of the Pew project that ran the survey.
posted on September 21, 2000 06:01:44 PM new
All polls and surveys are worthless...people just say they are concerned about privacy because that is all they hear about in the media.
CheyenneRoundup is correct. This stuff has been going on for years. Now that the internet is popular, why should it be any different?
If people really want privacy, then they should stay home, never go anywhere, never buy anything and stay off the internet!
posted on September 23, 2000 11:08:33 AM new
Thank you, Watafind, I try... Now you'll have to excuse me, I'm worried about my privacy so I'm going to barricade myself in my home, put on full body armor, and line up my tactical hand-held nuclear weapons, which I will use if anyone so much as calls me on the phone, no WAIT, I'm ripping my phone out of the wall right now....
posted on September 24, 2000 06:19:12 AM new
I guess the people who were victims of this and many THOUSANDS of crimes like it should barricade themselves in their houses and burn all their persoanl ID too... NAHHHH, what the heck is privacy important for?????
IDENTITY THEFT SUSPECTED IN ARRESTS
September 22, 2000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By ALDRIN BROWN
The Orange County Register
A routine traffic stop in Laguna Hills on Thursday resulted in the arrests of two Tustin men suspected of operating an identity-theft scheme that racked up more than 70 victims, sheriff's officials said Thursday.
Hong Ha Vinh Doan, 24, and his brother Tho Vinh Doan, 22, were arrested at their home after sheriff's deputies served a search warrant and allegedly found a cache of bogus drivers' licenses, credit cards and bank account information.
A handgun, ammunition, several thousand dollars in counterfeit money and about 200 tablets of the designer drug "ecstasy" also were recovered, a sheriff's spokesman said.
Sheriff's officials initially scheduled a news conference for Thursday morning to announce the arrests and provide details of the alleged criminal operation.
But the conference was later canceled because of the ongoing investigation, and sheriff's officials released only vague information about the scheme.
"The investigators are looking to see if this ring is any bigger than just the two of them, but at this point that has not been established," sheriff's Sgt. Steve Doan said.
Investigators launched a probe Tuesday after one of the brothers was pulled over while driving in Laguna Hills. Inside the car, officers allegedly found numerous identification cards, bank-account information, credit cards and other personal information belonging to more than 70 people, the spokesman said.
Hong Ha Vinh Doan was booked into Orange County jail for investigation of violating his probation by allegedly being in possession of the gun and ammunition.
His brother was booked on suspicion of violating his parole. Tho Vinh Doan served a prison sentence in the past for fraud-related charges, sheriff's officials said.
