Quote:
Originally Posted by taustin
And as I pointed out, that's between IMDB and PrivateEye.com, and she has no legal standing in that issue. She's not allowed to sue them for that specific act.
|
She didn't sue them for that specific act. The point of bringing it up is that IMDb was not allowed to distribute the information that they obtained from PrivateEye.com.
Quote:
Originally Posted by taustin
You, too, have no standing in that matter whatsoever. If they did so in violation of their merchant agreement, that's between them and their merchant service. If they did so as allowed in their merchant agreement, no violations have occured. You are not part of that equation.
|
Setting a legal precedent that a company can use credit card information without any consequences affects anyone who uses a credit card.
Quote:
Originally Posted by taustin
She sued over privacy regarding information that isn't private. And lost.
|
NIST Guide to Protecting the Confidentiality of Personally Identifiable Information (PII)
Quote:
|
PII is ―any information about an individual maintained by an agency, including (1) any information that can be used to distinguish or trace an individual‘s identity, such as name, social security number, date and place of birth, mother‘s maiden name, or biometric records; and (2) any other information that is linked or linkable to an individual, such as medical, educational, financial, and employment information.
|
The date of birth is private. IMDb could access it via PrivateEye.com using her credit card information, but it did so by agreeing not to distribute the information.
Quote:
Originally Posted by taustin
Completely invalid analogy. Discriminating on the basis of ethnicity is illegal. Discriminating on the basis of age, generally speaking, is not.
|
Meet the
Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967
Quote:
PROHIBITION OF AGE DISCRIMINATION
SEC. 623. [Section 4]
(a) Employer practices
It shall be unlawful for an employer-
(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s age;
(2) to limit, segregate, or classify his employees in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual’s age; or
(3) to reduce the wage rate of any employee in order to comply with this chapter.
(b) It shall be unlawful for an employment agency to fail or refuse to refer for employment, or other*wise to discriminate against, any individual because of such individual’s age, or to classify or refer for employment any individual on the basis of such individual’s age.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by taustin
Plus, to make it a a little closer to not being invalid, the job she's looking for is a role in a movie, remember. And let's say she looks caucasian, but the character is black.
|
Perhaps I didn't make it clear, the analogy wasn't with her as an actress. I said "a market that discriminates against Hispanics", considering that I don't know which job market specifically discriminates against Hispanics, and that the job itself is not the point, but the discrimination, and a person lying to bypass said discrimination.