| |
Good morning and welcome to the sixth and last in
a series of hearings on information privacy held by the Subcommittee on
Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. This hearing concludes one phase of
the subcommittee’s inquiry into information privacy, but not the inquiry
itself.
I think these hearing have fulfilled their
objective of informing the members and the public-at-large, in a deliberate and
careful manner, of the many issues implicated by the "privacy" debate.
The collective record of the six hearing is a rich source of information and
opinion on the issue of information privacy and should be used to inform the
debate on the issue. I once again commend members to review the hearing record
amassed by this subcommittee on the important issue of information privacy
before they formulate or finalize their judgments on the matter. In no other
location, either within or without the Hill, will we find a more comprehensive
record.
I am especially pleased to have as witnesses
executives representing some of the most revered names in corporate America. We
all are or have been, at one time or other, been customers of GM, IBM, Proctor
& Gamble, Amazon.com, and Land’s End. I appreciate the fact that these
companies didn’t have to be here testifying on the difficult public policy
matter of information privacy. I commend you all for your participation and look
forward to your testimony.
Many have written on or spoken to the issue of
information privacy in commercial world, as if the issue existed in a vacuum.
That is to say, some commentators on information privacy speak with little or no
consideration of realities that characterize the intersection between privacy
and the commercial world. Today, we have the rare opportunity to ask large
transnational corporations, representing differing industries, and the three top
data aggregators what really transpires in the "real" world with
respect to consumer information. The witnesses on the first panel represent a
diverse group of companies ranging from the world’s largest industrial
corporation with 400,000 employees to one that markets 300 brands of consumer
products to nearly 5 billion customers – I repeat 5 billion customers -
worldwide and an online company that in less than 6 years has become one of the
most recognized brands in retailing. These companies will all speak to how they
collect customer information; what types of information they collect; what uses
they put the collected information to; why they use the information in the way
that they do; and what business or legal incentives are in place assuring the
proper utilization of that consumer information.
Moreover, the witnesses on the second panel,
representing data aggregators or compilers, will help us better understand what
is it that they do. We may know the most about their credit reporting services.
We have invariably been subjected to credit checks in the course of our ordinary
lives, when applying for a car loan, mortgage, credit cards, etc…. Yet, many
of us may not know that these three companies provide authentication and
verification services enabling the seamless and speedy execution of millions of
small and mundane transactions every day, such as the purchase of a CD online
from Amazon.com or off-line from Tower records.
The insight offered by our witnesses is
especially important when considering the fine balance present between the
proper and improper collection and use of consumer data. As these hearings have
established, there are substantial benefits that accrue to our economy from the
unencumbered flow of information, particularly consumer information. Meanwhile,
these same hearings have highlighted the fact that Americans do have concerns
regarding abuses that may arise from the collection and/or use of certain types
of consumer information in the commercial context.
The objective of today’s hearing is to
demystify, make concrete, data collection and use practices common in the
commercial world today. To put it more bluntly, the testimony, I hope will help
separate fact from fiction, reality from myth when it comes to the issue of
information privacy. Only when empowered with real facts, can Congress advance
good public policy addressing information privacy.
|
|
