L'anonymat: un droit? - Le blog de Tris

L'anonymat: un droit? - Le blog de Tris
traduction google !
crisis-of-foi.com
Anonymity: a right?

The sensational declarations of the sister of the founder of Facebook, supported by the CEO of Google led me to reflect on the question of anonymity, a legal point of view.

Do we have a right to anonymity, either online or in "real life"?

If you look at the texts and I think in Article 9 of the Civil Code to make it simple but you can search even more, we are entitled to respect our privacy. Thus one has the right to ask you, except where otherwise very specific and well framed, your health, your sexual preferences, religion, how much you make, etc.. Similarly, your correspondence is private. One factor not to open it, read it and then decide whether you actually take it.

But what about anonymity? In practice, this is defined as the failure to be identified or identifiable in a photo in the street, on a video, etc.. Or being under a pseudonym. It may well be willing to be identified and identifiable under a pseudonym because French law recognizes the same user name and believes that we can protect it, especially for defamation. Indeed, a number of artists evolve as a stage name without it offends anybody. So why is it that what is accepted by the artists or people known and recognized is not acceptable for an average user? After all, why not let the opportunity for people to choose what they want to?

The fact that this kind of sensational statements come from the marketing director of Facebook is all the more ridiculous since I see very little of the giant social networks disable the accounts of celebrities simply because they have created their accounts with their stage names .

Only from a safe (and the word is not chosen at random), members of government or elected officials start talking about the end of anonymity on the Internet, it is understandable but when it comes to a social network, we just want to giggle and ask them to stop taking themselves seriously.

A social network, before being a marketing tool for clubs in need of customers, it is primarily for fun. This is also the success of social networks is the funny side. If tomorrow, you are asked a photocopy of the NIC or passport to register, I believe that the giant Facebook is going to put the key under the door.

Above all, Facebook or Google + are not the Web and the Web is not the Internet. Mark Zuckerberg is the head that was so swollen that it would not pass under the Arc de Triomphe, make him much good. It is pleased to have been received by Mr Barack Obama. But it is what it is: a social network designer, not a thinker of the Web and certainly no Internet. And it does not require in addition that we take his statements (or those of his brother, it's the same) seriously.

Internet is more than the sum of a series of identities proved. If our legal identity is important, even essential in carrying out certain acts, it is strictly no interest on the Internet, except in the case of commercial transactions.

Other interesting legal point: what about the right to oblivion? Example two-fifty round: you have thirteen and you are mad in love with Justin Bieber. You make it a declaration of love via Youtube boosted by tearing your T-shirt and an invitation to join you.

Fifteen years later, you became a young woman to graduate with a boyfriend all that is more serious and a good job. And a colleague laughs seeing this video. If you had the sense to publish under a pseudonym, you can still bias by saying that it's your sister, a neighbor, not you, Pope, whatever.

But if you had the obligation to publish under your real name, I believe that you may live a few painful hours at the office.

The right to forget joined the respect of privacy: no one wants to see spread before fifteen to work or at home because the mistakes of youth, let's be honest, we all do things sometimes regrettable 13-14yrs. The very principle of adolescence.

Finally, from a perspective quite pragmatic: I care less "real" name some of my contacts, both on Twitter, Facebook or Google +. What interests me is their contents, their texts. In short, the substance, not form.

Otherwise, there is a very simple way to watch Google + Facebook and we do not endorse such statements: unsubscribe
By Tris Published in: The cur sketched by me
Write comment Read 1 comment Share
Previous: A bad buzz can be very difficult ... Home
List of articles

Anonymity: a right?
Internet is not responsible for all the ills of the world
Anonymous true or false?
The Anonymous are not a team of Boy Scout
The press and hackers: a love not assumed
The dangerous shortcuts journalists
Journalists, nightmare hacktivists
When human dignity is undermined in favor of profit
The Anonymous: Terrorists?
HADOPI and UN reports that will become complicated