Demaestro - 8:21 pm on Aug 9, 2010 (gmt 0)
Generally, holding personal information (even if it's publicly available) requires a license
Where? Germany? China?
I have never heard of such a thing. What public info do you need a license to hold? I would love even 1 or 2 examples from a free world country. I can say that in Canada there is no general rule saying you need a license to hold public info. That sounds made up to me.
I don't doubt they exist but I am curious what an example of 1 would be cause I can't think of any PUBLIC info you need a license to hold. Hard to consider info public under those circumstances, could it even be considered public info if you need a license to hold it?
Yes you have, however, you have simply dismissed it as paranoid.
Kaled, humor me and add the reason to this thread, I seem to be reading over it.
What reason is there to not allow someone to record publicly available information?
I still haven't heard one argument that wasn't born from paranoia that gives reason to not have publicly available information stored and made available to the public.
Because it's none of your d*** business. That's not paranoid, I just want your nose out of my face.
So you are saying that publicly available information is none of my d*** business? Well now I understand why we disagree, because I am the public, and like it or not publicly available information is in fact my business. It is the beauty of a free society.