Apple Watch Already Facing Questions Concerning User Privacy

[jweinraub]

Does the AG have anything better to do than write silly letters on unreleased products?

 

[rjflyn]

The long and short of it is healthcare privacy is important and has big dollar attached for violations. The US federal govt can and does fine both the violator and also can fine anyone who should have known about it and didn't report said violations. These start in the neighborhood of $50,000 and go up. So just say if Apples Watch server were to somehow get hacked and it held 1 Million peoples privileged health information. We you get the idea, buy buy Apple.

 

[gnasher729]

Almost all of his questions are already answered by information released by Apple. If he's just doing his job, he could have don't some basic research to actually ask questions that you couldn't answer via a google search. It's pure grandstanding.

But press releases are not legally binding, and they are often not technically accurate. A press release may something that in the end means "trust us, we'll do the right thing" which doesn't tell you what exactly Apple would be doing.

 

[rGiskard]

AG is grandstanding, but these are questions that will be asked, so it's good to have them out there long before the launch. This is more for the public, since Apple obviously knows of all the privacy concerns if they sought help from the Mayo Clinic.

 

[s15119]

The act is HIPAA. No hippos were harmed in the making of this law.

What's covered by HIPAA is often exaggerated. To hear some tell it, saying "gesundheit" when someone sneezes is a violation. That said, if Apple does start storing or transmitting personal health data, they would very much be bound by HIPAA. In fact, protecting the privacy of electronic medical data records is the purpose of the law.

I mostly agree with you, but as the name suggests, it's aim is for health information to be portable (easily shared) and private. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.

http://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-...PAAGenInfo/index.html?redirect=/hipaageninfo/

 

[IJ Reilly]

I mostly agree with you, but as the name suggests, it's aim is for health information to be portable (easily shared) and private. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.

http://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-...PAAGenInfo/index.html?redirect=/hipaageninfo/

The privacy rules were created because of concerns over the portability of digitally-stored health records.

----------

The long and short of it is healthcare privacy is important and has big dollar attached for violations. The US federal govt can and does fine both the violator and also can fine anyone who should have known about it and didn't report said violations. These start in the neighborhood of $50,000 and go up. So just say if Apples Watch server were to somehow get hacked and it held 1 Million peoples privileged health information. We you get the idea, buy buy Apple.

Those big fines are for willful and uncorrected violations, essentially a penalty reserved for deliberate and unrepentant scofflaws. Fines for inadvertent violations start at $100.00.

 

[zioxide]

What exactly is the point of this other than a publicity grab? This AG looks to be old as **** anyways, I highly doubt he would even understand the answers to most of the questions he's asking.

 

[gochi]

lets face it technology was created to extract information or to make it readily availible