Privacy was Re: [governance] Who will be in Rio?

[Seiiti Arata]

Hi Adam,

QUOTE
On 10/8/07, Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
>
> I don't really understand why this has come up now,

UNQUOTE

As it happens that I am working in the Secretariat, I will be happy to pass
ahead any constructive suggestion that we may have towards improving the
system - and Robert's comment called my attention as I am personally
interested in the privacy field as a lawyer.

QUOTE
On 10/8/07, Robert Guerra <lists at privaterra.info> wrote:Seiiti:
Depends on your school of thought.

My recommendation would be for an attendee list to  - by default not list
people, and only list those who have given their consent. Ie. opt-in
UNQUOTE


Hi Robert - I guess I understand your comment. Is opt-in a statutory legal
obligation? Or more like an industry best practice as defined by
self-regulation and other non-binding recommendations?

My initial comment was based on the idea of the (difficult) separation
between public and private spheres. All which is done in public would have
lesser expectation for privacy, such as an IGF participation, as Adam points
out.

Just following up Adam's point, I see "higher justification" for transcripts
and audio recordings: they are made available to meet a public need and
interest. Which is a valid one, because those who cannot attend physically
have legitimate right to know what happened. And also those who did
participate may want to have some records for their organization, etc. In
Brazil there are legal cases where "paparazzi" material was held as
violation of privacy, even when related to activity done in public places,
because there was no legitimate interest from the public (curiosity not
being a legitimate one...).

But to get the registration list information I see less justifiers, and thus
the balance for privacy would point to a non-disclosure. It's an interesting
discussion.

I agree with Robert that one can also use the school of thought of personal
control. If one does not want to disclose info, this expectation should be
an option for him.

The question is, which of the many different possibilities would be best
applicable.

Please note that I am writing "as an individual" and not as a Secretariat
member. But I will be pleased to facilitate implementation of good
practices.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20071008/ffa3ac0c/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: message-footer.txt
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20071008/ffa3ac0c/attachment.txt>