Xref: utzoo alt.privacy:32 comp.org.eff.talk:1814
Path: utzoo!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!uwm.edu!rutgers!maverick.ksu.ksu.edu!matt.ksu.ksu.edu!james
From: james@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (James Alfred Monschke)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy,comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Caller ID problems
Keywords: Caller ID
Message-ID: <1991Mar31.050038.8811@maverick.ksu.ksu.edu>
Date: 31 Mar 91 05:00:38 GMT
References: <13801@asylum.SF.CA.US> <1991Mar29.154847.16915@engin.umich.edu> <1991Mar29.195940.12006@eng.umd.edu> <1991Mar29.220816.8305@ima.isc.com> <1991Mar30.043415.7314@odin.corp.sgi.com>
Sender: news@maverick.ksu.ksu.edu (The News Guru)
Organization: Kansas State University
Lines: 35

steres@chaos.asd.sgi.com (Chris Steres) writes:

>Much of the rhetoric advanced as criticism of caller ID seems to hinge on
>the privacy of the caller; while ignoring the issues regarding the privacy
>of the callee.  To protect MY privacy it seems that I should be allowed
>to screen my calls if it is technologically feasible.
>I think (opinion time) that the caller's "right" to privacy is somewhat
>diminished by the fact that they are engaging in an active attempt to
>establish communication; whereas the intended recipient is a mostly passive
>entity, and therefore deserves more consideration for their privacy.

   The main concern that I have heard voiced about this system is of 
bussinesses using it to build their mailing lists, or otherwise using it 
to promote their bussiness at the expense of the privacy of those who call
them.
   I perceive two distinct issues, anonymity, and privacy.  That is to say,
anonymity and privacy are seperate issues.  It is my belief that an 
acknowledged right to privacy does not include or imply a right to anonymity
in communications with another person, but that the information used to 
convey the caller's identity is potentially an invasion of privacy.
   The potential for abuse in the case of AT&T's caller id service exists
not because of a loss of anonymity, but because of an invasion of privacy 
when your phone number is given to convey your identity.

I would conclude that in order for this system to work without 
privacy being invaded, it would have to give the caller's name and/or
bussiness only.  Such a system is impracticle at present since anybody 
can call from any phone.

--
********************************************************************************
  James Monschke                               *     Jerry Falwell is the
  james@matt.ksu.ksu.edu                       *       Anti-Christ!!!!
    "A dirty old man in a young man's body."   *