release to third parties like the news reporter who published the video rental history of judge robert bork that paved the way to enactment of the video privacy bill. >>> third, despite claims that the video privacy protection act is outdated only a single provision of the statute was updated leaving consumer oriented provisions that should have been reviewed unalter and there was no consideration given to the fact that changes in the act will have to state laws that afford similar and sometimes broader protections to consumers. this oversight is likely to invite thorny conflict laws disputes given the borderless bound representatives of the internet. >>> the compani -- many online have a false sense of privacy due to their lack of understanding of lengthy and complex privacy policies they are compelled to agree to in order to use the service. as a result, online users often share a lot of personal information unknowingly and to unintended audiences. i do not believe that you kn unsuspected users should be deemed to give up their rights to a level of privacy. and my concerns are heightened

look at a specific bill to amend the law that was just passed in the house. 25 years ago, judge robert bork was before the full senate judiciary committee as a nominee to the supreme court. during that hearing, a local reporter ask judge bork's video store for a record of the movies he had watched. there was no law against it, so the video store gave him the records and the reporter wrote a story about them. the senate judiciary committee was split on judge bork's nomination but it was unanimous in its outrage over what hat happened. there wasn't anything particularly memorable about judge bork's movie rentals. in fact, they consisted primarily of mysteries and caper films. but that wasn't the point. the movies we choose to watch are our business and nobody else's. soon after this, senator leahy and senator grassley introduced the video privacy protection act. the bill was reported out of the committee unanimously and passed through the senate and the house on voice votes. there has been renewed interest in the video privacy protection act in recent months and i think that is great. but i'v

privacy protection act of one thousand nine hundred eight and was passed after supreme court nominee robert bork video rental records were disclosed in a newspaper so important place it was put in place to prevent such records from ever being revealed to the public and even though the language doesn't specifically extend to d.v.d.'s and newer forms of video rentals it's assumed that this legislation could be broadened to include those other formats now obviously this law might seem a little outdated but it is considered one of the strongest consumer privacy protection laws on the books you see the d.p.p. act has been recently debated at a senate hearing of the judiciary subcommittee on privacy technology and the law after netflix and a few other internet based companies started calling for that logic change so that your video history can be shared now why would they want that information shared well it's all about the money of course so netflix would like to share your video history with a third party site and social media sites just like websites that you use every day which are logging tons of