Security, Privacy and IP
Question One
There are allegations that the pharmaceutical company Merck & Co paid specialist nurses $500,000 to hunt through patient records for potential candidates for the firm's new anti-arthritis drug Vioxx. The allegations made in court that the local Merck marketing team provided incentives so that pharmacists would "tell suitable patients" to talk to their doctors about Vioxx.
Juanita Fernando, chair of the Australian Privacy Foundation's health committee, said recent news reports suggested some doctors were "selling or trading health records" to third parties without patients' knowledge or consent. http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0,24897,25517817-5013044,00.html
This has only come to light in the past few weeks, and seems like it will be hotly debated over the coming months, while evidence is being gathered. This will now be the subject of a class action in the Federal Court in Melbourne. I look forward to seeing the result of this, especially after the law suit that has already been brought against Merck & Co in relation to this very drug (Vioxx), claiming that it can induce Cardiac complications.
Obviously, there has been little done thus far, in relation to the privacy breach, due to the recentness of the claims. However, I believe that this may result in a tightening of privacy legislation in response.
Question Two
I have been using Turnitin this semester for all of my assignments. I have found it to be a useful resource for completion of assignments. Although, I find that the best aspect of using Turnitin, is the fact that it takes the guesswork out of plagiarism issues. Also, it ensures that the assignments we complete cannot be “ripped-off” by future students. Therefore, giving me peace of mind that the research and hard-work I have put in will not be compromised.
This seems like it ties in extremely well with the issue of privacy. I wouldn’t want anyone accessing my work and taking credit for it. As well an author would like to think that the ideas and concepts they write about, will not be reproduced, without authorization.
Friday, June 5, 2009
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Week Ten Exercises
eBusiness Trust
Question One
Definitions:
Trust is not associative (non-symmetric): Just because one party trusts the other, does not mean that the level of trust is reciprocated by that other party.
Trust is not transitive: I believe this means that trust is not a gradual process, it is one or the other. You either do trust the other party or you do not. When applied to the online world, you either trust the website or seller you are dealing with or you do not trust them. It is not a case of, “I nearly trust this seller, and if they do not rip me off in the next transaction, then I will completely trust them.”
Trust is always between exactly 2 parties: I feel that this alludes to the two parties involved must be seen as equals, so as to be able to have full trust. If inequality exists, then there is always the possibility of the stronger positioned party taking advantage of the other. This element of doubt takes away the chance of trust being formed or maintained.
Trust will involve either direct trust or recommender trust: Recommender trust I believe is taking the words of others about a party, to form an opinion, or level of trust about another party. An example of this would be ratings of an eBay seller given by past buyers, and using these ratings to gauge if a seller should be trusted.
Question Two
Elements that have been incorporated to increase your trust in the sites:
http://www.eBay.com.au: Security Centre – Encourages buyers to believe that their details are safe. Seller Ratings – To give the buyer a sense of background information about the people they are dealing with. Feedback Forums – Another form of recommender trust. Policies Page – A user can then be made aware of what their obligations are. Buyer Protection – A sense of security, and that the website will look after the buyer.
http://www.anz.com.au: Security Alerts – To give the user a sense of the bank being at the forefront of online security. Antonia Kidman – Celebrity endorsement. Friendly Faces – People in the pictures look happy, so as to put the potential new customers at ease (better than putting photos of people crying, I guess). Security and Privacy Statement – To give the impression that they are looking after the customers best interests.
http://www.ozrural.com: Phone Number and Address – Nothing to hide image. History of the business – Can be used as a get to know you type facility, like the chat page, or to prove that it is not a fly by night business. Reviews – Check out other people’s opinions, to help credibility. Chat page – mentioned above.
http://www.paypal.com.au: Security Centre – Encourages buyers to believe that their details are safe. Dad and Son Photo - People in the pictures look happy, so as to put the potential new customers at ease. Product Disclosure Agreement – Another way to appear transparent and open with the client. Privacy Statement – To give the impression that your details will remain anonymous to other people. Feedback Page – A place to vent, if needed.
Question Three
A web site that I think looks untrustworthy, is any page that is not laid out well, gives this impression. One that does not have any reviews, or feedback. A website that does not disclose any information about security.
However, the website that I will highlight is www.mininova.org/, they lost my trust, when I caught a virus off their website. It was probably partly my fault, for not having the security settings on my computer at a high enough level, but I will never trust them again.
Question One
Definitions:
Trust is not associative (non-symmetric): Just because one party trusts the other, does not mean that the level of trust is reciprocated by that other party.
Trust is not transitive: I believe this means that trust is not a gradual process, it is one or the other. You either do trust the other party or you do not. When applied to the online world, you either trust the website or seller you are dealing with or you do not trust them. It is not a case of, “I nearly trust this seller, and if they do not rip me off in the next transaction, then I will completely trust them.”
Trust is always between exactly 2 parties: I feel that this alludes to the two parties involved must be seen as equals, so as to be able to have full trust. If inequality exists, then there is always the possibility of the stronger positioned party taking advantage of the other. This element of doubt takes away the chance of trust being formed or maintained.
Trust will involve either direct trust or recommender trust: Recommender trust I believe is taking the words of others about a party, to form an opinion, or level of trust about another party. An example of this would be ratings of an eBay seller given by past buyers, and using these ratings to gauge if a seller should be trusted.
Question Two
Elements that have been incorporated to increase your trust in the sites:
http://www.eBay.com.au: Security Centre – Encourages buyers to believe that their details are safe. Seller Ratings – To give the buyer a sense of background information about the people they are dealing with. Feedback Forums – Another form of recommender trust. Policies Page – A user can then be made aware of what their obligations are. Buyer Protection – A sense of security, and that the website will look after the buyer.
http://www.anz.com.au: Security Alerts – To give the user a sense of the bank being at the forefront of online security. Antonia Kidman – Celebrity endorsement. Friendly Faces – People in the pictures look happy, so as to put the potential new customers at ease (better than putting photos of people crying, I guess). Security and Privacy Statement – To give the impression that they are looking after the customers best interests.
http://www.ozrural.com: Phone Number and Address – Nothing to hide image. History of the business – Can be used as a get to know you type facility, like the chat page, or to prove that it is not a fly by night business. Reviews – Check out other people’s opinions, to help credibility. Chat page – mentioned above.
http://www.paypal.com.au: Security Centre – Encourages buyers to believe that their details are safe. Dad and Son Photo - People in the pictures look happy, so as to put the potential new customers at ease. Product Disclosure Agreement – Another way to appear transparent and open with the client. Privacy Statement – To give the impression that your details will remain anonymous to other people. Feedback Page – A place to vent, if needed.
Question Three
A web site that I think looks untrustworthy, is any page that is not laid out well, gives this impression. One that does not have any reviews, or feedback. A website that does not disclose any information about security.
However, the website that I will highlight is www.mininova.org/, they lost my trust, when I caught a virus off their website. It was probably partly my fault, for not having the security settings on my computer at a high enough level, but I will never trust them again.
Week Nine Exercises
Channel Conflict
Question One
There is a removal of traditional limitations of business and interaction between buyers and sellers has already changed. For example:
In the past there where the three L’s of retail sales, location, location, location. However, now there is no need for a retail outlet at all, and sellers can access buyers all over the world, via online shopping.
Buyers have a greater choice now, whereas in the past they were limited to what was available in their area, now they can compare price, quality and service from all corners of the globe.
Competition between sellers is also not limited to their area, and they now need to compete globally. Also, this can occur between retail outlets and online stores of the same brands. Competition is no longer reserved for between companies, but it now occurs within companies.
Question Two
Who owns the customer relationship? One would like to imagine (whichever side of the fence you are on) that you own the customer relationship. However, I still believe that at the end of the day, the buyer has ultimate control over the relationship, because they inevitably make the decision to buy or not to buy, and if they do who and how to buy the product or service.
However, in this sense I would imagine that if a company researches the habits of buyers and tabulates this information so as to be able to better market to their clients, then, they have full ownership of the customer relationship. It is not information that would be considered to be vitally sensitive thus requiring privacy law intervention. Therefore, I would surmise that if the individual companies take the time and effort to research this data, then it is their prerogative as to how to use it.
Question Three
If you purchase something from a retail outlet is it then ok for you to get email promotions or is it SPAM? This is a sensitive issue, and I personally feel that SPAM is one of the major blights on the Internet. I guess by releasing your information to these companies you have to some degree (sometimes unwillingly) given them permission to contact you. In my experience, I have found that the large majority of companies will offer you the option of being contacted in the future via email, and to me this is the best way for this sort of SPAM to be distributed. Also, I feel that random SPAM is useless, and personally, counterproductive, as I make a point of never using the products or services of a company that has sent me random SPAM that I have not authorized. If I have allowed the company to send me email offers, then I can accept that or reject it. The choice is still left up to the individual. My advice, use a SPAM filter.
Question Four
I believe that buying keywords is ingenious and should be applauded for its foresight. This is just marketing at its purest level, seeing an edge and taking it on. However, it can be a little frustrating when you are searching for a topic online that just happens to be a big brand, and it takes you ages to scroll through all the brand sites to get to what you need. I feel that buying keywords by companies is a little immoral though all the same, but I still say if the opportunity is there, you have to take it. The search engine providers are the ones that need to be asked this question. Do they believe that this practice is immoral? I bet they say it is fair game!
I never knew this:
Coke is the solid carbonaceous material derived from destructive distillation of low-ash, low-sulfur bituminous coal. www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coke_(fuel)
Question One
There is a removal of traditional limitations of business and interaction between buyers and sellers has already changed. For example:
In the past there where the three L’s of retail sales, location, location, location. However, now there is no need for a retail outlet at all, and sellers can access buyers all over the world, via online shopping.
Buyers have a greater choice now, whereas in the past they were limited to what was available in their area, now they can compare price, quality and service from all corners of the globe.
Competition between sellers is also not limited to their area, and they now need to compete globally. Also, this can occur between retail outlets and online stores of the same brands. Competition is no longer reserved for between companies, but it now occurs within companies.
Question Two
Who owns the customer relationship? One would like to imagine (whichever side of the fence you are on) that you own the customer relationship. However, I still believe that at the end of the day, the buyer has ultimate control over the relationship, because they inevitably make the decision to buy or not to buy, and if they do who and how to buy the product or service.
However, in this sense I would imagine that if a company researches the habits of buyers and tabulates this information so as to be able to better market to their clients, then, they have full ownership of the customer relationship. It is not information that would be considered to be vitally sensitive thus requiring privacy law intervention. Therefore, I would surmise that if the individual companies take the time and effort to research this data, then it is their prerogative as to how to use it.
Question Three
If you purchase something from a retail outlet is it then ok for you to get email promotions or is it SPAM? This is a sensitive issue, and I personally feel that SPAM is one of the major blights on the Internet. I guess by releasing your information to these companies you have to some degree (sometimes unwillingly) given them permission to contact you. In my experience, I have found that the large majority of companies will offer you the option of being contacted in the future via email, and to me this is the best way for this sort of SPAM to be distributed. Also, I feel that random SPAM is useless, and personally, counterproductive, as I make a point of never using the products or services of a company that has sent me random SPAM that I have not authorized. If I have allowed the company to send me email offers, then I can accept that or reject it. The choice is still left up to the individual. My advice, use a SPAM filter.
Question Four
I believe that buying keywords is ingenious and should be applauded for its foresight. This is just marketing at its purest level, seeing an edge and taking it on. However, it can be a little frustrating when you are searching for a topic online that just happens to be a big brand, and it takes you ages to scroll through all the brand sites to get to what you need. I feel that buying keywords by companies is a little immoral though all the same, but I still say if the opportunity is there, you have to take it. The search engine providers are the ones that need to be asked this question. Do they believe that this practice is immoral? I bet they say it is fair game!
I never knew this:
Coke is the solid carbonaceous material derived from destructive distillation of low-ash, low-sulfur bituminous coal. www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coke_(fuel)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
