Under the U.S. Constitution, the Right to Privacy is interpreted under the 4th Amendment’s prohibition of "unreasonable searches and seizures" clause. But, does that extend to private companies doing business in the U.S.? Conversely, in Canada, its Constitution establishes a Right to Privacy per se, stating that all Canadian citizens’ are entitled to their privacy. U.S. lawmakers and citizens’ have obscured the word "privacy" to such an extent that its true meaning maybe irrelevant. For example, in the United States, the presumption is that a person would "opt out" of having a vendor sell their private information to a third-party, whereas in Canada and the European Union, that choice is an "opt in" philosophy.
The American social networking giant, Facebook, which has had its privacy policy highly scrutinized in the U.S., was told by Canadian Privacy Commissioner, Jennifer Stoddart, that it must do more to protect the privacy of Canadian citizens’, or face possible lawsuits. This statement was posted on a Facebook wall for all the world to see. Jim Bronskill, of The Canadian Press, reported that Ms. Stoddart feels that Facebook breaches federal privacy law by keeping users’ personal information indefinitely – even after members close their accounts. She also raised concerns about the sharing of users’ files with the almost one million third-party developers scattered across the globe who create Facebook applications such as games and quizzes.
American businesses, citizens, and politicians need to demand a universal standard of care (i.e. privacy law) that can provide adequate guidance for companies to follow in determining what is an acceptable level of care for safeguarding information. Companies that deal in social networking, cloud computing, or data processing sectors, will not feel a need to come together and reach some sort of an accord until there is a threat of liability. "The Internet," as a product, has morphed into a new stage of development. Much like when the automobile was first invented, at that time, the most critical aspect of a car was its brakes (afterall, what good is an engine if it gets wrecked). Then over time came headlights, windshield wipers, mirrors, seatbelts, airbags, and electronic notifications. A Web 2.0 world has necessitated that "safety precautions" be made to avoid potential liability. In an analogous way, at what point did we stop blaming the auto manufacturers for fender benders, and start putting liability on the car driver themselves.
Could the major players, like Facebook, even come to the table and agree on a standard? The stakes are critically high for them not too. The risks associated include dealing with a court system that doesn’t want to solve the problem (see Judge Jones’ opinion in Johnson v. Microsoft), or legislators that have inadequate knowledge on the issue, and draft laws that answer very little. Whether one agrees with the Canadian approach to dealing with the privacy issue, it does highlight the fact that, as a country, the United States has a long way to go at safeguarding mission-critical data.