To Record Is Corporate - Banking/Finance Edition
Well, here we are back again with a tiny table of paranoia covering the banking/finance industry. Sorry it's so small, but I've only got so many banking relationships -
|Wells Fargo||Yes||Yes (very difficult)||Yes|
Some privacy advocates urge the adoption of a new legal regime for the transfer of information about consumers among private-sector databases. This "mandatory opt-in" regime would require private businesses to ask for a consumer's permission before trading information about that consumer, such as his buying habits or hobbies, to third parties. This would, in effect, create new privacy rights.
These new rights would conflict with our tradition of free speech. From light conversation, to journalism, to consumer credit reporting, we rely on being able to freely communicate details of one another's lives. Proposals to forbid businesses to communicate with one another about real events fly in the face of that tradition.
New restrictions on speech about consumers could disproportionately hurt small businesses, new businesses, and nonprofits. Older, larger companies have less need for lists of potential customers, as they have already established a customer base.
There is no way in hell some Corporation should have more rights than an individual.
I guess the thing that hacks me off is a corporation's attempt to reserve a legal procedure solely for its own benefit.
Tom... it is, isn't it? I was surprised though that financial institutions are more amenable to your recording them than the telcos are. The telcos are downright paranoid.
Though, it's not like you're going to sue 'em.
Aba... In fact, one wonders the Court just decided to give up on the whole "Constitution" thing?
John... My few experiences with WaMu have been OK. Better than Wells Fargo service wise, but their people seemed a it slow. When I asked them to shutoff the recording, I had a hard time trying to get them to take me seriously. And then, they just couldn't seem to grok the idea.