Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

Please bear in mind that while I will mention ZeeJustin in this post, the question I will discuss is the ethics involved when corporations publishing sensitive data on individual customers. It should be construed as an “in general” kind of discussion. Please keep replies specific to either ZJ or JJ’s cases off this thread unless valid points in a broader sense. Also, it is important to note that I do *NOT* under any circumstances condone the actions of Mr Bonomo, however I *DO* question the judgment shown by the PartyPoker and PokerStars management teams when releasing sensitive information, regardless of their legal jurisdiction – this is mostly a moral issue, not a judicial one.


According to privacy laws in most civilized countries (including the US), corporations are generally discouraged (or outright prohibited) from publishing information pertaining to their individual customers to third parties. That such laws are in place should prove that our expectations are that our personally identifiable information and other sensitive data held by corporations are indeed held within said organization.

The leak of personal data pertaining to any possible breach of customer names, customer screen-names, credit card information, bankrolls, hand histories, and any other information held by any corporation and/or poker site this will construe a breach of the reasonable expectation of privacy. This expectation of privacy will also cover any breach of the Terms of Service (ToS) pertaining between customer and vendor.

Now you probably know where this discussion is heading – the murky areas which has yet to been discussed in the poker community. Now, please keep in mind that this is a separate event and a breach of ToS only between the customer and the vendor. It is also well within the rights of the vendor to permanently prohibit any customer from using their service again.

Under what circumstances will it be correct, if ever, to publish/leak information regarding a customer to the general public? Also, what will be the objective of publishing information that could identify a paying customer as opposed to publishing and rectifying the situation for the affected customers in a manner that will not identify any individual? Additionally, what can the consequences for the affected individual be if sensitive information regarding his agreement with said corporation becomes public?

Now, I do not want this to become another ZJ thread, however I would invite you – the reader – to put yourself in the shoes of ZJ and think about the ramifications this breach of expected privacy will have for your current situation, your immediate future and in a more prolonged period of time. While I will make no excuses for the actions of ZeeJustin, as they were clearly wrong, how does the punishment of public exposure, loss of $96,000, loss of opportunity (lost access to PartyPoker, and as a direct consequence of this, also PokerStars) etc., equate to the crime?

Will your view change if someone loses their life over this?

I believe these questions should pose for some interesting discussion, let’s see what we can come up with.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

Criminals have no reasonable expectation of privacy.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

Thank you for the insightful comment on this subject. Care to elaborate?

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

Is this a new ZJ account name?

Multi-accounting is awesome!

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Criminals have no reasonable expectation of privacy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. Party has now turned over the home addresses of all of their US players for violating anti-gambling legislation.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

I'm not actually sure what the OP is getting at though. Of course there should be privacy conditions when you exchange personal information with poker sites. But I don't see what they released that wasn't already public. (ZJ ran a blog, people knew his sn and real name).

The purpose of Stars/Party action wasn't so much to punish him as it was to make an example for the rest of the multiaccounters. That's why it's so public.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

can you elaborate on this please. party is trying to get people in trouble with the US?

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

What I am asking is; Should *any* information that could be contrued as sensitive or link an identifiable person to an incident of cheating, including but not limited to sn?

We still have no OFFICIAL word from Party regarding this matter - if ZJ did not post and confess towards his actions, we would not have any proof on the validity of these claims.

What when I post a fake e-mail from party accusing YOU of being a cheater? Is the punishment in any way comparable to the crime? Is this a case where the cure is worse than the disease?

The main reason I post this is due to the extremely negative impact this will have on two individuals who commit relatively minor offences, who have been branded as cheaters and is/will be universially hated within the poker community for the foreseeable future (probably will have issues in any casino/other public places the next few years).

Additionally, and perhaps the crux of this: Could Party not have handled this in a more considerate manner? Surely an official post on their official webpage explaining actions taken against 2 big time winners would be just as effective.

To me, this smells like corporations (and the mob) taking the law in their own hands. I could be wrong, and there could be issues I have overlooked - this is why I would like to see some discussion on the matter.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Criminals have no reasonable expectation of privacy.

[/ QUOTE ]


This was the correct answer and was not trollish. And if someone who cheats and steals thinks party has done wrong by broadcasting same, then they should pass the hat around to collect the few mil necessary to try to sue them in Gilbraltar so that they can get a $1 jury/bench award.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

Here's the thing. ZeeJustin CHOSE to make himself famous. He hosted an online blog. He happily got his name in poker articles and on websites. He CHOSE not to be anonymous online, and built up a high profile in the online community - which was also extremely profitable for him.

Why shouldn't he be publicly outed when he's caught cheating? This isn't some anonymous dude who cheated Party then had his name and address posted everywhere. This is a person who CHOSE to be high profile and let his name and identity be freely known, so he could profit from it. Do you see the difference?

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

Indeed, however he did NOT choose to have Party release information (through 3rd parties) regarding any ToS violation (which in essence this is).

Yes, he would have an explanation problem when suddenly disappearing from Party - that does not automatically give Party the right to basically throw him to the mob, now does it?

It is a very difficult situation, however lets try to keep this off the specific ZJ inident - these questions are much more fundamental than that (and yes, I could be prone to agree with your assessment in this specific case).

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Criminals have no reasonable expectation of privacy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't you run into a problem with this...

Say you're speeding, which is breaking the law/committing a crime. If you're pulled over and the cop asks to search your car you can still say "No". Your breaking the law by speeding doesn't give the police reason to go searching your car. Right?

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

[ QUOTE ]

Will your view change if someone loses their life over this?

[/ QUOTE ]


This was the most comical part of the OP. If ZJ or anyone else is so despondent over being outed publicly as a cheat, then they shouldn't focus on the outing, but on their own behaviour. And if they are seriously thinking of harming themselves, then they should check themselves into a psych program and get on meds. Criminals do often become very despondent over being caught and that becoming known. But that is no reason not to name and shame them.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

This post is relevant and it is quoted from the ZJ thread. It is from Myturn2raise. Funny I found another place to quote it. But criminals often have to deal with this scenario as illustrated in this quote.

[ QUOTE ]
The sun comes up. You made a mistake and I hope you come out OK through it all. I've been in your shoes in some ways and it sucks. But, I hope you can make the best of the situation. I'm not saying it will be a positive event. I doubt it will be. Just make the best of what has happened, because that is all you can do.

I made a terrible mistake when I was 19, which I've mentioned a few times in the forum before. I was heavy into the drug scene. Most people I knew were 'doing it.' No one was getting in trouble for it. I, and my acquaintences, didn't think much trouble would result if we did get caught. No one was being hurt by what we were doing. Well....

I got caught. I was breaking the law. I thought then, and still think, that the laws are/were stupid. However, that gives me no right to not obide by those laws.

It turned out to be a big deal. Through months of legal battles/negotiations, I was fortunate enough to receive only a 3 years sentence in the department of corrections for a possession charge. (The time served was much less as I was a first-time, non-violent offender who received good-time credit though I did violate prison rules... yeah, nothing about prison is logical.)

At the time, I was studying to become a high school teacher. Good luck with that. Decisions at 19 can bar one permanently from a chosen field. I moved into a different field when I tried to put my life back on track. I earned numerous degrees from a major university in a prestigious program (one which is consistently rated as tops in the country), but I still could not find employment. Once a felon, always a felon. Luckily, poker exists and I was still able to find my niche and make a few dollars.

Today, I live a different, but still very good life. Many avenues were blocked, but, luckily, this is a land of opportunity.

[/ QUOTE ]


Also I'd like to reiterate that ZJ was a high profile player. He was an online poker celebrity. Any effects of his actions will likely not ripple much farther then the poker world. Celebrities have to deal with being under the microscope all the time. It comes with the territory. I'm sure we are all aware of britney Spears driving superfast with her newborn in her lap, or Wynona Ryder stealing from Dillards or where-ever. There is only mob mentality here because of the high profiles of both JJ and ZJ.


EDIT: I guess my point was that neither JJ or ZJ would be able to avoid this leaking out, regardless of how the sites handled it. They are just too high profile.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

The question remains: Regardless of whether or not it would leak eventually, is it ethical to purposefully leak it?

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

[ QUOTE ]
The question remains: Regardless of whether or not it would leak eventually, is it ethical to purposefully leak it?

[/ QUOTE ]


A criminal that has harmed numerous citizens has no right to privacy, and those harmed have the right to know who harmed them. That's the bottom line. Online or B&M world. And regardless of whether it is the site operator or a 3rd party doing the exposing. Cheaters and thiefs don't have a moral right to remain anonymous when caught.

You are focusing on the wrong aspect of these situations.


And speaking of anonymity, why don't you tell us your original poster name before you created this gimmick account?

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

I have no problem with a 2rd party posting this.
Here's essentially how I read it.


Attention World:

I have uncovered a player who I know to be an online-cheat.
His name is XXXX.
Here's the e-mail from Party confirming that he cheated.
If you played in an event against him or any of his accounts I think you should be aware that you may be due some compensation.
Even if you haven't played against him you may be interested in asking Party how much cheating is going on at their site and what they intend to do about it.



Your point that somebody can just make it up is somewhat valid I suppose.
But I could also just say that you rob little children of their milk-money and I can do this right now if I choose.

So I'm not too concerned on the 'dangers' of someone faking a 'so-and-so is a cheater' e-mail.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

This is not a gimmick account. I've been lurking and found this topic interesting, that is all.

Also, cheaters and thieves - says who? Where is the evidence? You're right, there is no public evidence.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

For the last time:

If you are worried about the backlash of cheating, DON'T CHEAT. Pretty simple.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

[ QUOTE ]
This is not a gimmick account. I've been lurking and found this topic interesting, that is all.

Also, cheaters and thieves - says who? Where is the evidence? You're right, there is no public evidence.

[/ QUOTE ]


In the case of stars at least, their poker room manager, Lee Jones, who is well known here, provided that evidence on ZJ in the main ZJ cheat thread. Unless of course he's some gimmick account and the real Lee Jones never reads these forums and hasn't caught on yet.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

1. US laws in no way pertain to off shore poker rooms.
2. Companies sell your personal information every single day.
3. This is poker, these cheats are lucky that someone doesn't come and break their thumbs. Just like any other "sport" the players need not be anonymous. When a player is suspended in the NFL, the league discloses the amount of money that is lost per game.
4. I believe that you have a choice to play at these online card rooms or not. If you don't like that cheaters have their identity and bank rolls disclosed then show your voice by not playing at these card rooms.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

People with egos as large as ZJ don't take their own lives, they pretty much think that the world centers around them.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

ZJ admitted to cheating, also this would be VERY easy to prove, they could easily obtain the IP addresses of the computers that he used. Not only could they be traced to ZJs location but patters could easily be developed.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

Now you are talking about warrant less search which is illegal. The police are however able to post in the newspaper that fact that you were pulled over and what you were pulled over for, this is a closer analogy. The warrant less search issue would be analogous to the police coming to ZJ's house and searching his computer, which in this country would not be legal without a warrant.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

[ QUOTE ]

The main reason I post this is due to the extremely negative impact this will have on two individuals who commit relatively minor offences, who have been branded as cheaters and is/will be universially hated within the poker community for the foreseeable future (probably will have issues in any casino/other public places the next few years).

To me, this smells like corporations (and the mob) taking the law in their own hands. I could be wrong, and there could be issues I have overlooked - this is why I would like to see some discussion on the matter.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is by no means a minor offense. you clearly do not undersatnd that advantage that a player has who is playing 2 hands at the same table. This is a MAJOR offense. If ZJ played back in the day when Doyle was hitting the games back in Texas he would be at the bottom of a lake right now, and he would not have scuba gear. You screw other people out of $100,000+ and there is a price to pay.

Party and Stars simply took the money back and will redispurse it to the players that deserve it. I feel that Party should send out a press release regarding the matter and should do that will all cheaters.

RE: B&M play, these guys should be banned from the casinos. And they should cast out of the poker community. They are know cheats.

RE: the corporation taking the law into their own hands, IT IS THEIR JOB TO POLICE THIS SITUATION.. The mob would put these cheats to the bottom of a lake and you would never hear from them again.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have no problem with a 2rd party posting this.
Here's essentially how I read it.


Attention World:

I have uncovered a player who I know to be an online-cheat.
His name is XXXX.
Here's the e-mail from Party confirming that he cheated.
If you played in an event against him or any of his accounts I think you should be aware that you may be due some compensation.
Even if you haven't played against him you may be interested in asking Party how much cheating is going on at their site and what they intend to do about it.



Your point that somebody can just make it up is somewhat valid I suppose.
But I could also just say that you rob little children of their milk-money and I can do this right now if I choose.

So I'm not too concerned on the 'dangers' of someone faking a 'so-and-so is a cheater' e-mail.

[/ QUOTE ]

Microbob is spot on. If I was someone was cheated how am I supposed to know about it unless it is publicized? The people cheated have a right to make a claim for damages. Party is perfectly within their rights to publicize this.

Look at class action lawsuits as an example. Some one might be using a dangerous product or be eligible for compensation based upon somebody else's improper actions. How do you find theses people? You have to publicize it. The right to privacy is not an issue, the expectation of privacy is silly.

So, using OP's analogy, would a pedophile still have a right to privacy, even if he moves across the street from an elementary school? Should a poker cheat has the right to privacy at an online poker site?

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have no problem with a 2rd party posting this.
Here's essentially how I read it.


Attention World:

I have uncovered a player who I know to be an online-cheat.
His name is XXXX.
Here's the e-mail from Party confirming that he cheated.
If you played in an event against him or any of his accounts I think you should be aware that you may be due some compensation.
Even if you haven't played against him you may be interested in asking Party how much cheating is going on at their site and what they intend to do about it.



[/ QUOTE ]

Bob - I think the problem is that Party included zjustin's login name in the email that was sent to the op (not of this thread, of the ZJ outing thread). When I read that I was very mad at Party for a disclosure of that amount, however my anger was mitigated by the disgust I had in zjustin's actions.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

Duty to protect the interests of non-cheatering customers > duty to protect the privacy interests of [douche bag] cheaters.

This argument holds morally, legally, ethically, etc.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Now you are talking about warrant less search which is illegal. The police are however able to post in the newspaper that fact that you were pulled over and what you were pulled over for, this is a closer analogy. The warrant less search issue would be analogous to the police coming to ZJ's house and searching his computer, which in this country would not be legal without a warrant.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're pulled over for a speeding violation and refuse a "request" to search your vehicle (or body), that alone is probable cause in most jurisdictions and no good will come of it.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

I think we should see Poker as a Sport in these days. The arguments that in Doyles time ZJ would be on the bottom of a lake or missing his thumbs etc. just pulls it back to the niche Poker was back then.
For all Pokerplayers it is very profitable that Poker has become accepted in the society as "sport", like chess. Pls don't discuss the word sport, as you can call it a game of skill if you want.

If we want to hold on that, we should punish the cheaters the same way they are punished in sports.
What is done with a sportsman that uses doping?
The federation will tell the public the names, the medicamentation they used and will ban them for a certain amount of time.
I think we should relate to PP and PS as federations in this case. Ok, there is no other federation in the world that takes that high rakes but ...
What i want to say, is that they should not be seen as companies that must in first line protect the privacy of sportsmen, but as federation, that must protect the sport.

I hope everybody learns from their mistakes and would recommend a two years ban. After that everybody deserves a new chance.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Duty to protect the interests of non-cheatering customers > duty to protect the privacy interests of [douche bag] cheaters.

This argument holds morally, legally, ethically, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Duty to protect the interests of non-cheatering customers > duty to protect the privacy interests of [douche bag] cheaters.

This argument holds morally, legally, ethically, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Fine, but there is no reason to expose the privacy of a cheater if there is no benefit other than gossip value for the public.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Duty to protect the interests of non-cheatering customers > duty to protect the privacy interests of [douche bag] cheaters.

This argument holds morally, legally, ethically, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Fine, but there is no reason to expose the privacy of a cheater if there is no benefit other than gossip value for the public.

[/ QUOTE ]

The benefit to the public is that this sort of behavior will not be tolerated. The public stockade served a similar purpose years ago.

It also benefits those who were cheated. Suppose Party came out and said they caught 3 anonymous cheaters and confiscated $400k in their accounts that will be distributed to those affected. The only way Party prevents itself from being accused of keeping the entire amount is to publicize the screen names of the cheaters so that those who were cheated can make a proper claim.

I have no desire to play with a cheater and would want to know if one ever sat at a table with me.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Indeed, however he did NOT choose to have Party release information

[/ QUOTE ]

Just like none of the people he cheated CHOSE to be cheated.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Fine, but there is no reason to expose the privacy of a cheater if there is no benefit other than gossip value for the public.

[/ QUOTE ]


You misworded that sentence. Replace the word "privacy" with "crimes/misdeeds" and then see if that sentence makes sense to you. If it does, then write your congressman to press for a constitutional ammendment treating all criminal cases as juvenile offender ones in which the criminal's name is not released and the records sealed, with the public having no way of knowing whom to watch so that they aren't victimized.

Stop identifying with cheaters, liars and thieves, and start identifying with the victim and seeing the victim's right to knowledge of who screwed him over and how.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

Party didn't release anything to the public. Here's what MO'M wrote in the email to Meowed.

"A total of six accounts, all with different biographical information, were making multiple entries into the same tournament from the same IP/system."

That's it. ZeeJustin posted later with the letter that had his account names in it.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

[ QUOTE ]
The main reason I post this is due to the extremely negative impact this will have on two individuals who commit relatively minor offences, who have been branded as cheaters and is/will be universially hated within the poker community for the foreseeable future (probably will have issues in any casino/other public places the next few years).


[/ QUOTE ]

Who are these individuals - certainly not anyone we have been discussing recently.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The main reason I post this is due to the extremely negative impact this will have on two individuals who commit relatively minor offences, who have been branded as cheaters and is/will be universially hated within the poker community for the foreseeable future (probably will have issues in any casino/other public places the next few years).


[/ QUOTE ]

Who are these individuals - certainly not anyone we have been discussing recently.

[/ QUOTE ]


Exactly. I am only aware of individuals who have committed certifiably major offenses of stealing over 100K each.

And if they are so worried about their poker reps, then they should find another line of WORK. Or use the money stars was nice enough to refund to them to get plastic surgery.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

I wish the the users of this board would be allowed to determine how many threads they want to start about a particular topic. As long as there is no abusive language or personal attacks it should be up to the forum members to decide what they want to talk about.

Re: Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.
 

You must be another multi-account cheat in order to have this opinion. Even the most liberal bleeding heart in the world would disagree with your position. Are you attempting to justify your own actions?