24 April 2009

RIFD + NIR = BB

Updating on an earlier post. I sent a modified version of the letter/email to my MEP's. It's a bit more 'me' than the suggested one a couple of posts back.

Dear Stephen, Martin and Fiona,

I have recently been finding out more about this issue and I am very concerned by the European Union’s proposals for RFID and the Internet 3.0. This is unacceptable privacy-invading technology with safeguards that wouldn't be worth much in practice.

I am very concerned that none of our MEPs appear to have spoken out about this. I will be using this issue as a litmus test with regard to my voting next time and encouraging my friends and colleagues to do likewise. Because this is an issue so open to subversion by commercial and certain political agendas, to be credible, I need to hear pro-active
proposals to block and prohibit, or at least effectively neutralise (outside of the stores) RFID product tagging. I wary too of RFID being put in government documents.

I also need to hear you will stop EU funding for research on RFID and the Internet of Things unless it be for things that will effectively enable us to escape the privacy invasion represented by RFID. I have come across the EU proposals for privacy protection and I am not impressed. Even 'Opt-in' is not enough to preserve our privacy. We should not be building an infrastructure for tracking people because once it is in place -unless there are effective counter measures- it can be used criminally and the temptation for governments to use its
revenue potential will be too great at some point in the future.

Yours sincerely,

nonsuch: RIFD plus NIR equals big brother

1 comment:

canoewolf said...

I had 3/6 replies from my MEPs so far:
1st a referral ...
2nd a response that confused my comments with someone else's issue - say no more!
3rd from a chap agreeing 100% and urging me to vote UKIP!
The point is - we must keep trying - and getting these guys/girls into action...

Christian England? Maybe not...

I've just read an interesting blog article from Paul Kingsnorth . I've responded to it elsewhere with regard to its consideration of...