ChoralWiki talk:Privacy policy
to have or not to have... a privacy policy
| Help |
I've spoken with a couple of people about this project. One person suggested we reexamine whether CPDL should have a privacy policy, and what we would be trying to accomplish by it. My thoughts about this are that we want to inform Internet users, who may not be as aware about what personally-identifiable information about them is captured. However, this goal can be accomplished via a general informational page that talks about wikis or when you visit a web page generally, and does not necessarily have to be done via a Privacy Policy. A Privacy Policy may create additional legal obligations, so some care should be taken. I am not a lawyer, but I believe that CPDL in its current or foreseeable state is not required to post a privacy policy. California has an [http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=bpc&group=22001-23000&file=22575-22579 Online Privacy Protection Act] that went into effect July 1 2004. Here is a [http://www.americanbusinessmedia.com/images/abm/pdfs/government/CAprivacy.pdf summary]. I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is that although it requires a Privacy Statement in some cases, I believe the requirement would not apply to CPDL for the following reasons:
So my thinking is that we should hold off on developing a privacy policy for the present, especially given the Transition committee's discussions and the more urgent priorities such as back-ups. I'll plan to pause this indefinitely but would appreciat hearing other thoughts. |
- Please don't get me wrong on this one - I welcome and admire your contributions to CPDL. But if you end up repeatedly asserting that CPDL doesn't require a privacy policy, then why would you even bother to start a talk page on the subject? Surely other aspects of cpdl management are in dire need of attention, rather than this one? joachim 08:39, 29 August 2008 (PDT)
|
- My thoughts on privacy policies are pretty much the same as those on copyright: if you put it outthere, there isn't much point in complaining afterwards. Much as I agree that people are entitled to compensation, not to mention recognition for their efforts, I'm also aware of the fact that that simply doesn't happen. Look at any score page on CPDL: thousands of hits for the most popular one, yet how many users have even bothered to inform the editor/composer of them using a score? Or to mention him/her in their program handouts? Not very polite, to be sure, but unfortunately very real.
- The same goes for privacy: no matter how hard you try, any half-decent hacker can do a lot of harm with even a fake email address if he really wants to. So if one really cares passionately about either one's copyright or privacy, I think one should resort to traditional publications, which can be traced and tracked, rather than this very insecure medium.
- Don't get me wrong - I'm not trying to downplay the importance of copyright/privacy, though the outrageous application of it by so many music publishers is probably the reason why sites such as these exist. But I think the amount of text, time and webspace devoted to it is naive at best - although that might just be because I'm luckily not part of the over-legislativised (it that is even a word) Anglo-Saxon community. joachim 01:55, 5 September 2008 (PDT)
|