[LINK] grog gamut

[Richard Chirgwin]

  On 5/10/10 10:13 AM, Roger Clarke wrote:
> At 7:13 +1100 5/10/10, Richard Chirgwin wrote:
>> To me, the key question in this debate is this: what moral force should
>> be given to the blogger's custom of anonymity? On what arguments can we
>> base the assumption that anonymity is a right?
> Still catching up, sorry
>
> 1.  Aust Privacy Charter (1994)
> http://www.privacy.org.au/apcc/Charter.html#PCP10
> 10. ANONYMOUS TRANSACTIONS
> People should have the option of not identifying themselves when
> entering transactions.
>
> 2.  National Privacy Principles (2000)
> http://www.privacy.gov.au/materials/types/infosheets/view/6583#npp8
> 8. Anonymity
> Wherever it is lawful and practicable, individuals must have the
> option of not identifying themselves when entering transactions with
> an organisation.
>
> 3.  ALRC Recommendations (2008)
> http://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/For%20Your%20Information%3A%20Australian%20Privacy%20Law%20and%20Practice%20%28ALRC%20Report%20108%29%20/20-anonymi
> UPP 1. Anonymity and Pseudonymity
> Wherever it is lawful and practicable in the circumstances, agencies
> and organisations must give individuals the clear option of
> interacting by either:
> (a) not identifying themselves; or
> (b) identifying themselves with a pseudonym.
>
> 4.  Aust Govt Response (2009)
> Response:  Accept
> Giving individuals the option to interact anonymously or by using a
> pseudonym is an
> effective way to protect individuals' privacy by ensuring that
> personal information is only
> collected where necessary.
> This obligation should be limited to where it is lawful and
> practicable for agencies and
> organisations to allow anonymous or pseudonymous interaction.
> 'First Stage Response to the Australian Law Reform Commission Report
> 108', Cabinet Secretary to the Australian Government, October 2009
> (p. 39)
> http://www.pmc.gov.au/privacy/alrc_docs/stage1_aus_govt_response.pdf
>
>
> Well, you asked  (:-)}
>
Many thanks, Roger. That's at least more solid ground than "I don't like 
it therefore it's wrong"!

The next questions, hair-splitting:

1. Is "publication" the same as "transaction"?
2. If "Yes", then with whom does the person publishing a blog enter into 
a transaction, to the extent that they can claim the same right of 
anonymity as you've outlined?

Cheers,
RC