Posted on 03/13/2003 10:46:10 AM PST by fight_truth_decay
Fashion designers from New York to Milan have filled the runways in recent weeks with all the latest Spring looks. Hemlines are up, heel heights are down and pink is all the rage. But regardless of what you think of this season's haute couture you should be made aware of a trend that's catching on... it could make you think twice before buying new clothes. Tiny specks capable of tracking virtually every single item are now being imbedded by manufacturers. This Orwellian technology, called RFID (radio frequency ID) will now be used by Italian clothing designer Benetton in the form of trackable chips woven into it's apparel. The chips, which function as itty bitty radio transmitters will be inserted when the clothes are made and will remain intact throughout the life of the garment. According to chip manufacturer Philips Electronics, the devices will be "imperceptible" to the wearer.
Sound like something out of a futuristic sci-fi thriller? Welcome to your brave, new world.
Benetton is not alone in implementing this frighteningly invasive technology. Gillette has already purchased 500 million of these tracking devices and starting in July will imbed them in shaving cream and razors sold at Wal Mart stores. The chipped items will sit atop "smart" shelves that will work in unison with the chipped products to tell Gillette and Wal Mart all kinds of things; and the info-gathering doesn't end there. As an extra added bonus ,when shoppers take their Big Brother -branded purchases home (and wherever RFID "readers" are located,) their purchase will be tracked. RFID Journal touts the technology as a way to eliminate bar codes, cut down on labor costs and theft and says it will be a boon to inventory control.
The founder and director of a group called C.A.S.P.I.A.N. (Consumers Against Privacy Invasion And Numbering) sees it differently. Katherine Albrecht, a Harvard University doctoral candidate says what Benetton, Gillette and over 90 of the world's biggest corporations are doing, in essence, is "registering" those products to you. Albrecht has been warning us about this for years. She says consumers have no idea that these RFID chips actually track the owner .. " then anytime you (go) near an RFID reader device the (product) would beam out your identity to anyone with access to a database - all without your permission".
Think this is waaaay out there? It's not. According to a 2001 INFORMATIONWEEK article on the RFID scheme, proponents are looking ahead to a seamless, network of millions of RFID receivers in airports, stores and even your home. And remember, you can't turn these things off.
Benetton, which had sales of over $2 billion last year apparently thinks spending the 25 cents to 50 cents per chip will be money well -spent. The company has ordered 15 million chips for starters. So along with your mock turtleneck you'll be getting an RFID gizmo which operates at 13.56 MHz, and stores 512 bits of information. RFID Journal says "unless there is a big public outcry, Benetton is not going to be the last retailer to adopt RFID".
Did you get that? IF NOBODY GETS UPSET ABOUT THIS IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN! Don't just SIT there, DO something...Be part of that "big public outcry" they doubt will happen 'cause you're either catatonic from too much TV, or you just plain don't care.
Know that the likes of Kimberly Clarke, Coca- Cola, Philip Morris, Target, the U.S. Department Of Defense and the United States Postal Service (just think of the implications of THAT!) are watching this Benetton thing very carefully. They're poised to begin their own chipping programs in the not-too-distant future.
Where is all this technology coming from? From the brilliant minds at MIT's Auto-ID Center. In just a few years the center has raked in tons of money from some heavy-duty global corporations who are raring to go on this. The effects of this RFID technology are truly chilling. Consumers wouldn't be able to escape the watchful eye of manufacturers, retailers and marketers. Law enforcement would have a field day with this as well. Individual's behavior could be monitored to the nth degree.
So what can YOU do about it?
Spread the word. Boycott Benetton.... (Gillette, too, while you're at it) and make sure they know you've stopped buying their products and WHY.
Get educated. Check out C.A.S.P.I.A.N.'s web site: at http://www.nocards.org/. It's a good place to start.
Call your local media (radio talk show hosts, newspaper editors, TV stations).
And think about going naked. Katherine Albrecht has. She says "I'd rather go naked than wear clothes with spy chips".
As for me, I have no problem wearing the old stuff I have hanging in my closet. I might not make any new fashion statements but I'll be making a statement that doesn't ever go out of style in a free society. My statement's summed very well in something called the 4th Amendment.
Related Articles: Benetton Clothing To Carry Tiny Tracking Transmitters AP
Mary Starrett was on television for 21 years as a news anchor, morning talk show host and medical reporter. For the last 5 years she hosted a radio program. Mary is a frequent guest on radio talk shows. E-Mail M123STAR@aol.com
What's the solution? Repeal patent laws?
In my opinion, we are debating the "very real privacy issues at stake here" with the amount of decorum such drivel deserves. If I were interested in anyone taking me seriously on threads such as these ... well, that would be impossible. Threads such as these should NOT be taken seriously.
So, we are being very consistent. If someone is reading my emails or going through my trash, all I can say is that they're going to be mighty bored AND have dirty hands.
Privacy concerns are drivel? Very well, apparently you haven't much appreciation for privacy. That's fine, everyone is certainly entitled to their own opinion. Let the forum weigh your posts accordingly.
If someone is reading my emails or going through my trash, all I can say is that they're going to be mighty bored AND have dirty hands.
Sounds a lot like "If you haven't done anything wrong you don't have anything to worry about".
...the mu-chip is a Pandora's box, believes Lee Tien, an attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EEF), a San Francisco-based organisation that specialises in the conflict between technology and personal rights. Although he has no intention of demonising the Hitachi chip, it is nevertheless an example of how surveillance technology is getting cheaper all the time.
Overtones of Big Brother may not be the only problems. If tiny chips woven into money and other valuables were constantly announcing their whereabouts, a thief would know precisely which person or home to rob. By the same token, chips in clothing—linked to their owner's identity at the time of purchase—could mark the wearer's location anywhere on earth.
I don't have time or space to pose a solution to this huge problem on this thread. One could write books on the topic.
In a nutshell, privacy must be seen as an essential element of liberty, and prioritized as such.
I just have to face the fact ...
When somebody is going to get flamed for something,
I always just seem to be "The Little Man Who Wasn't There".
As I was walking down the stair,
I met a man who wasn't there ...
He wasn't there again today;
Oh how I wish he'd stay away.
Your magnetic personality, of course.
I would insist on his giving full credit and acknowledgement to the "enter you and a couple of other jokers on this thread", were I in your place.
Of course. I didn't mean to be inconsiderate. BlueLancer, please consider post #59 to be addressed to you as well.
In other words, the same language abortion rights activists use to justify abortion ...
The penumbra in the Constitution with respect to the Right to Privacy?
The Gap, based in San Francisco, is interested in the chip for its marketing potential. Gap wants to integrate the chip into its clothing labels, so that when a customer buys a pair of jeans, or a little black dress, that information will be sent straight to the company's database. Gucci or Chanel and other designers could use the chips to expose imitations. Hospitals could use the chips for patient-identification.
...or Debit card.
No, if there is to be any change to the Constitution, I do not advocate any method but the amendment process. I am no fan of judicial activism.
That said, federal government privacy intrusions can be constitutionally argued using the 4th and 10th Amendments. The 4th is relevent for obvious reasons, the 10th is relevent because powers not delegated (to spy) are forbidden.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.