Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-05-30-Speech-4-104"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020530.6.4-104"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The invention of
mail and the Internet offers unprecedented opportunities to people other than the users themselves. It can be abused by anyone who wants to make money by pestering fellow citizens with advertising for things that the people involved do not want at all. Worse still is when the recipients themselves have to pay for the privilege of receiving unsolicited advertising. There is therefore every reason to offer people legal protection against floods of unsolicited information which cost time and money to receive.
At first reading on 6 September 2001, I spoke in favour of an opt-in instead of an opt-out. This finally appears possible now, thanks to the proposed decision. I had therefore decided to vote in favour until it appeared that a new problem was arising. This time it is not the pushy private money-maker that is the villain, but the intrusive government, feared for its security standards. In the past, mail and telephone confidentiality was introduced to guarantee people freedom, but the compromise between the two main groups now makes it possible to abolish the protection of personal data. Tapping and recording communications might be unavoidable in extreme criminal cases, subject to a court warrant, but this must never become common practice."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples