Bozeman Drops Requirement For Social Networking Passwords

from the wonder-what-made-that-happen? dept

Mon, Jun 22nd 2009 12:54am — Mike Masnick

Last week, we were among a bunch of blogs and news organizations who questioned the fact that the city of Bozeman, Montana was making job applicants hand over not just info on their social networking activities, but usernames and passwords to all accounts. This certainly got a lot of attention, and, not surprisingly it's caused the city to drop the requirement and to say that it had made a mistake (found via Slashdot). Still, it makes you wonder why it took a press onslaught for the city to recognize the potential problems with such a privacy violation.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: bozeman, job applicants, privacy, social networks

10 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Chris, 22 Jun 2009 @ 3:16am

Criminals
If after the Lori Drew case, breach of TOS can be a criminal matter, doesn't this mean that City of Bozeman are guilty of "inciting" people to commit at criminal act.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Jun 2009 @ 3:17am

Old Noobs
What do you expect from old noobs? Seriously, the same people running your city and governing new laws are the same people that use the CD drive as a cup holder, actually looked for the "any" key, and don't know the difference between a search engine and address bar, etc.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Jun 2009 @ 3:34am

Maybe they should just say "ooops" and join the Pirate Party?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Poster, 22 Jun 2009 @ 3:41am

Re: Criminals
Nah, Bozeman was acting to protect potential employees from themselves, not...y'know, driving a teenage girl to commit suicide. Which is why Lori Drew was really convicted.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Felix Pleşoianu, 22 Jun 2009 @ 7:17am

"it makes you wonder why it took a press onslaught for the city to recognize the potential problems"

Isn't it obvious? They knew it was an absurd requirement. They wanted to see if they can get away with it. Had there been no public scandal, they would have went ahead silently.

And yes, pushing the limits like that is more typical of little children. But it's worryingly common among people in positions of power. I'm not sure whether they never actually grow up, or maybe they regress mentally once they can no longer keep up with the times.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hephaestus (profile), 22 Jun 2009 @ 8:45am

Hooah!!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RD, 22 Jun 2009 @ 9:08am

Easy
"Still, it makes you wonder why it took a press onslaught for the city to recognize the potential problems with such a privacy violation."

Its no wonder at all, Mike, as you well know (you're just playing devil's advocate there).

It takes a press onslaught (and public backlash) to get these people to back off of an invasive privacy policy because, absent the backlash, these people in power will ALWAYS (I say, ALWAYS) try to get more and more power over the people they "Serve." See also: Federal Government.

It is only when the people rise and protest loudly over these issues that the people's rights are ever taken into consideration. Otherwise, they will attempt to take even more away from us if they can get away with it.

To all you mouth-breathing Apologitards(tm) out there who come to the defense of these people (and the RIAA, govt, etc) ....THIS is why you dont accept things under the "well, if you've got nothing to hide..." bullshit argument for not standing up for your rights.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Josh Straub, 22 Jun 2009 @ 10:31am

Response to RD 9:08 AM
Agreed 100%! Well said...especially that last sentence.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Crabby, 22 Jun 2009 @ 11:23am

Re: Response to RD 9:08 AM
Indeed, silence give assent, does it not? A little bit of revolution now and again is a very, very healthy thing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Daniel, 24 Jun 2009 @ 1:11pm

I can't believe this got out of someone's head and into policy. I understand the argument that it was supposed to ensure the city was only hiring trustworthy people, but this was the worst way to do it. Login information is extremely sensitive and handing it over to -anyone- is a violation of the terms of service of most sites.

Amusingly enough, according to Newsy.com Facebook reported last week that they'd be in touch with the city. When a city government gets its hand smacked by a social site, that says something about both parties.
[ link to this | view in thread ]