Ethics of Releasing Sensitive Information - ZJ related.

[Karakaz]

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.

[DesertCat]

Criminals have no reasonable expectation of privacy.

[Karakaz]

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

[LozColbert]

Is this a new ZJ account name?

Multi-accounting is awesome!

[roueful]

[ 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.

[roueful]

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.

[spacetime]

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

[Karakaz]

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.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ 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.

[Phil153]

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?