Tom Vogt wrote:
> unless you
> use the word very different on your side of the pond, privacy is
> something that only applies to people.
Let's suppose for a moment that it would be as you say --
privacy is something that only applies to people. Then, company
ACME would have no privacy rights, meaning that its documents
would be wide opem to the public, which implies that all persons
that work at ACME now have the results of their work (patent
rights and trade secret rights, for example) open to the public
as well as their records in ACME's computer. Which contradicts
the hypothesis that people have privacy rights. Hence, privacy
cannot only apply to people ... otherwise it would not apply
to people.
This is also not a US-centric view. Privacy of communications applies
to anyone, in most countries. Also, in the US as well as in most
countries, a newspaper can protect the anonymity of its source, a
private company does not have to disclose its statements, etc. --
all, expressions of privacy rights.
Cheers,
Ed Gerck
