National Congress of American Indians National Council of Health Care Services National Council of Negro Women, Inc. National Council of State Education *National Council on Crime and Delinquency *National Education Association National Emergency Civil Liberties Committee National Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs National Federation of Federal Employees National League of Cities *National League for Nursing National Legal Aid and Defender Association National Municipal League National Opinion Research Center National Rehabilitation Association National School Boards Association National Student Lobby National Tenants Organization National Urban Coalition National Urban League National Welfare Rights Organization *Neighborhood Health Center Seminar Program (OEO) Neighborhood Legal Services New York Bar Association New York State Education Department Newspaper Guild Ohio State Bar Association People Against National Identity Cards Planned Parenthood-World Population (Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc.) Political Data Archive, Michigan State University Political Science Laboratory and Data Archive, Indiana University * Sent copies of completed studies or policy statements. Population Association of America Professional Women's Caucus Public Services Laboratory, Georgetown University Regional Social Science Data Archive, University of Iowa Rhode Island Consumers' Council Rhode Island Council of Community Services, Inc. Seafarers International Union of North America Seattle Veterans Action Center Sigma Delta Chi Simulations Councils, Inc. Social Data Exchange Association Social Science Data Archive, Survey Research Laboratory, Univer sity of Illinois Social Science Data Center, University of Connecticut Social Science Data Center, University of Pennsylvania Social Science Information Center, University of Pittsburgh Society for Information Display Society for Personnel Administration Southern Christian Leadership Conference Student American Medical Association Student National Coordinating Committee Survey Research Center, University of California at Berkeley Travelers Aid, International Social Service of America United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America U.S. Conference of Mayors United Steel Workers of America Unitarian Universalist Association UNIVAC Users Association University Legal Services Virginia Bureau of Vital Records and Public Health Statistics Western Electronic Manufacturers Association Women's Action Alliance Women's Equity Action League Appendix B "Computers and Privacy": The Reaction in Other Countries Common Concerns Most of the advanced industrial nations of Western Europe and North America share concerns about the social impact of computer-based personal data systems. Although there are minor differences in the focus and intensity of their concerns, it is clear that there is nothing peculiarly American about the feeling that the struggle of individual versus computer is a fixed feature of modern life. The discussions that have taken place in most of the industrial nations revolve around themes that are familiar to American students of the problem: loss of individuality, loss of control over information, the possibility of linking data banks to create dossiers, rigid decision making by powerful, centralized bureaucracies. Even though there is little evidence that any of these adverse social effects of computer-based record keeping have occurred on a noticeable scale, they have been discussed seriously since the late sixties, and the discussions have prompted official action by many governments as well as by international organizations. Concern about the effects of computer-based record keeping on personal privacy appears to be related to some common characteristics of life in industrialized societies. In the first place, industrial societies are urban societies. The social milieu of the village that allowed for the exchange of personal information through face-toface relationships has been replaced by the comparative impersonality of urban living. Industrial society also demands a much more pervasive administration of governmental activities-the collection of taxes, health insurance, social security, employment services, education-many of which collect and use personal data in an impersonal way. Nor should we overlook the increasing uniformity of industrial societies fostered by mass communications media so efficient that few issues of genuine interest and importance fail to achieve near-global extent. Concern about the effects of computer-based record keeping appears to have deep roots in the public opinion of each country, deeper roots than could exist if the issues were manufactured and merchandised by a coterie of specialists, or reflected only the views of a self-sustaining group of professional Cassandras. The fragility of computer-based systems may account for some of the concern. It is not necessary for public opinion to be unanimously opposed to the computerization of personal-data record keeping, or even actively mistrustful of it, to destroy the effectiveness of a record-keeping operation. The active opposition of even a few percent of those whom a system means to serve can cripple the powerful, but fragile, mechanism of a highly automated system. Nor is it necessary for this opposition to be manifested in physical sabotage of the computer itself (although that has happened); it is enough merely to withhold cooperation. There are few computer systems designed to deal with the disruption that deliberately lost or mutilated punched cards in a billing system-to give a simple example-would cause. Thus, the very vulnerability of automated personal data systems, systems without which no modern society could function, may make careful attention to the human element transcend national boundaries. The Response in Individual Nations WEST GERMANY On October 7, 1970, the West German State of Hesse adopted the world's first legislative act directed specifically toward regulating automated data processing. This "Data Protection Act" applies ་ to the official files of the government of Hesse; wholly private files are specifically exempted from control. The Act established a Data Protection Commissioner under the authority of the State parliament whose duty it is to assure that the State's files are obtained, transmitted, and stored in such a way that they cannot be altered, examined, or destroyed by unauthorized persons. The Commissioner is also explicitly responsible for observing the effects of automated data processing on the operations of the State government, and on its decision-making powers. He must take particular note of whether computerization leads to any displacement in the distribution of powers among the governmental bodies of the State. Thus, the Data Protection Act of Hesse seems designed more to protect the integrity of State data and State government than to protect the interests of the people of the State. As a pioneer statute in the field of computer law, however, its exact practical effects could scarcely have been predicted, and in no way diminish its usefulness as a guide for other jurisdictions that can learn from the Hesse experience. To judge from the second annual report of the Data Protection Commissioner, that experience has been one of mild philosophical frustration, punctuated by occasional practical victories. In one instance, the Commissioner learned of the existence of a computer in a university clinic only through a newspaper account of a fire; in another the Commissioner successfully blocked the release of criminal records to a private research center. Based on the experience of Hesse, the States of Rheinland-Pfalz and Hamburg have passed similar acts, and the States of BadenWürttemberg, Schleswig-Holstein, Bavaria, and Lower Saxony have adopted slightly more circumscribed laws or regulations. At the Federal level, the Bundestag has considered a number of proposals for national laws of wider scope than any of the present State laws, but the estimated costs to data holders of complying with the proposed requirements for mandatory disclosure of data have thus far raised enough objections to cause the Bundestag to reconsider 1 Federal Republic of Germany, State of Hesse, Hessischer Landtag, Vorlage des Datenschutzbeauftragten (Report of the Data Protection Commissioner), Document 7/3137, 29 March 1973. Reviewed in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung fur Deutschland, 18 April 1973; English version of review in The German Tribune, No. 578, 10 May 1973, p. 3. |