Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!spool.mu.edu!cs.umn.edu!dmshq!com50!craig
From: craig@com50.c2s.mn.org (Craig Wilson)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Those (henious) Information Brokers; who are they?
Message-ID: <1991Apr23.133156.5822@com50.c2s.mn.org>
Date: 23 Apr 91 13:31:56 GMT
References: <8683@crash.cts.com> <1991Apr21.151853.11183@com50.c2s.mn.org> <8741@crash.cts.com>
Organization: Com Squared Systems, Inc.
Lines: 25

In article <8741@crash.cts.com> lairdb@crash.cts.com (Laird Broadfield) writes:
>In article <8683@crash.cts.com> I wrote:
>*sole and/or primary business* is the collection and sale of "personal"
>information, especially those whose datasets extend beyond mailing-list
>data, into lifestyle, health, financial, etc.
>

Do you think that the lists that charitable organizations, special interest
groups, and profession specific companies use are not fine-tuned using
'lifestyle' parameters?  If I donate to Greenpeace, does that help define
my lifestyle?  Will Minnesota Freeze target me as more likely to provide
funds?

You want to get a list of the big 'drug' dealers, and don't care about the
users.  Just because Lotus decided to pull out of the business doesn't mean
that there aren't others that will take their place.  After all, there are
customers waiting.

Excuse me, if I misinterpreted your original request.  I was not trying to
be condescending or cute.  I just feel that companies that are legally
filling the need for 'lifestyle' information are not criminals.  The
criminal aspect comes in when false data is disseminated.  Or, when the
information is used as a weapon, ala Robert Bork's video selections.

/craig