Privacy laws in the United States are patchwork at best. More often than not, they miss the mark, leaving most people with little real privacy. when Such laws are enactedThey seem suited to protect those in positions of power.
Laws designed to protect crime victims can also protect offending officers by labeling them as crime victims in cases such as resisting arrest. Assault on officer. Such charges are often used in excessive force cases, keeping police names out of the spotlight.
For example, a recent New Jersey law arose out of a tragic incident in which a government employee faced violence, prompting a legislative response. Known as “Daniel’s Law,” it was created after the personal information of a federal judge’s family was used by a murderer to track them down. Rather than a comprehensive privacy law that could protect all New Jersey residents, it focuses exclusively on protecting specific public employees.
Under the law, judges, prosecutors and police officers can request that their personal information (for example, addresses and phone numbers) be scrubbed from public databases. Popular services that people use to find information, such as WhitePages or Spokeo, must comply. While this sounds like a win for privacy, the security stops there. The average citizen still lives in the open, with no legal recourse if their personal data is misused or sold.
At the center of the debate is a lawyer who has taken up the cause of protecting police personal data. He is suing numerous companies to make such information accessible. While noble at first glance, a deeper look raises questions.
It proves that the lawyer’s company has previously collected and monetized the individual data. And when Data Services responded to his demands by freezing access to some of the firm’s databases, he and his clients cried foul — despite specifically requesting restrictions on how their information could be used.
It is also worth noting how unevenly data protection measures are applied. For instance, cops often rely on the same tools and databases they’re now asking to be banned. These services have long been used by law enforcement for investigations and background checks. However, when law enforcement data appears in such systems, special treatment is required.
A recent anecdote involved a police union leader who was shown a simple property record pulled from an online database. The records displayed basic details like his home address and the square footage of his property — information anyone could find with a few clicks. His reaction was one of shock and anger – a clear disconnect.
For everyday citizens, this level of data exposure is a given. But to enforce the law, it requires a level of granular exclusion that is not practical.
Perhaps everyone, including law enforcement personnel, deserves better protection against data harvesting and abuse? But what Daniel’s law and subsequent incidents involving police officers show is the need for reform in the way data is treated, not just for one segment of society, but for all.
Instead of extending privacy rights to all New Jersey residents, the law makes exceptions for the powerful — leaving the rest of the population as vulnerable as ever.
(Photo via Unsplash)
See also: EU AI law raises controversy over data transparency
Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI and Big Data Expo Taking place in Amsterdam, California and London. Co-located with other leading events including comprehensive events Intelligent Automation Conference, BlockX, Digital Transformation WeekAnd Cyber Security and Cloud Expo.
Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars hosted by TechForge here.
https://www.artificialintelligence-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/zoshua-colah-E1lR_C-IGdo-unsplash-scaled-e1734329497300.jpg
