The bankruptives involving personal data should not end. In 2000, the Federal Trade Commission was settled with Toysmart Reselting bankruptcy to ensure that the customer’s data could not be sold as an asset that should emphasize his unexpected use of data. And in 2015, FTC Intervention at the Radio bankruptcy to ensure that I would ever promise not selling customers’ personal data. (Radioshack finally agreed to destroy.) The case of toysmart also ate the role of Embudsman’s consumers privacy. Judge bankruptcy can choose the ombud to help the court consider how to sell your personal data can affect the bankruptcy or earnings for consumers and anything that can be annoying. The US Trustee has requested an appointment of ombud in this case. When scholars get the role to have more teeth and FTC and the state for intervention more often, framework for protecting personal data on bankruptcy is available. And finally, the judge judge has the power to make a decision about how (or what) property in bankruptcy. Here, 23andme has a further policy policy than toysart or radioshack. But the risk occurred if the genetic data falls in the wrong hands or severe blades and cannot be changed. And given the failure of 23andme to build a viable business model from testing kits, as if new businesses will use genetic data in unfamiliar data or wish. Optical Requirements for Genetic Data can solve this problem. Genetic data (and other sensitive data) can be held by bankruptcy trause and released as individual users to give consent. If the user failed to vote after the time, the data will still be deleted. This will meet new owners of 23andme to achieve user beliefs and build a business that provides a business value, rather than find an unexpected way to exploit data. And it will take almost uncomplicable in people who genetic data are at risk: After all, they have a lot of DNA. Try the alternative. Before the 23andme went to the bank, COO then made two failed to buy, at the price you reported $ 74.7 million and $ 12.1 million. Using a higher offer, and with 15 million users, which can be used under $ 5 per user. What can absolve the risk of genetic policy permanently to increase the value of some dollars for ESTA bankruptcy? Of course, this makes a larger question: Why do you have to buy genetic data millions of Americans in bankruptcy? Its simple reply: Parliament is allowing him. Federal and state errors allows the company to disrupt the promise to protect the American data sensitive with hybrid. When 23andme was founded, in 2006, the promise was a personal health care for. Today, the next 18 years, that time may be almost now. But with the privacy laws like us, who will trust? Keith porcaro is Rueben Everett Senior Lecting Fellow in School Duke Law.
