<div dir="ltr">Hi <div><br></div><div>Well, now, the NYT recommends some American states for addresses of shell companies</div><div><a href="http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/04/08/business/need-to-hide-some-income-you-dont-have-to-go-to-panama.html?_r=0&referer=http">http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/04/08/business/need-to-hide-some-income-you-dont-have-to-go-to-panama.html?_r=0&referer=http</a><br></div><div><br></div><div>Also another hashtag #MossackFonseca or #MossackFonsecaPapers brings other sides to the story (Pro and Against the association to Panama)</div><div><br></div><div>Indeed some interesting points in these debates:</div><div><br></div><div>* The idea of privacy only for some (i.e. those who can afford emails such as @<a href="http://tradedirect.biz">tradedirect.biz</a> ) or for everyone.</div><div><br></div><div>* The debate about education on cryptography, cybersecurity etc. which should be responsiblity for companies but, somehow, also for govts who should have laws in data protection and the provisions on when this data can an can not be shared (something Brazil is also struggling) - and the role of media in sharing this data</div><div><br></div><div>* The notions of democracy, citizen participation and data protection - how these intertwine</div><div><br></div><div>* How can international data protection laws coexist and how to act internationally with them</div><div><br></div><div>Best, </div><div><br></div><div>Renata</div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 2:00 PM, James Gannon <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:james@cyberinvasion.net" target="_blank">james@cyberinvasion.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-size:14px;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">
<div>
<div>Hmm I don’t know if I agree with this as it seems to make the assumption that forming a shell company in Panama can only be for nefarious or corrupt reasons which is just not the facts of the matter. And its very unforuntate that the two classes of companies
or uses are bunched togher in any debate that I’ve seen around the Panama Papers releases.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Plenty of genuine reasons for doing so that are not for illegal reasons or reasons to undermine public goods.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-James</div>
<div>
<div></div>
</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<span>
<div style="font-family:Calibri;font-size:12pt;text-align:left;color:black;BORDER-BOTTOM:medium none;BORDER-LEFT:medium none;PADDING-BOTTOM:0in;PADDING-LEFT:0in;PADDING-RIGHT:0in;BORDER-TOP:#b5c4df 1pt solid;BORDER-RIGHT:medium none;PADDING-TOP:3pt">
<span style="font-weight:bold">From: </span>Ncuc-discuss <<a href="mailto:ncuc-discuss-bounces@lists.ncuc.org" target="_blank">ncuc-discuss-bounces@lists.ncuc.org</a>> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <<a href="mailto:icann@ferdeline.com" target="_blank">icann@ferdeline.com</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Date: </span>Sunday 10 April 2016 at 5:48 p.m.<br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">To: </span>Renata Aquino Ribeiro <<a href="mailto:raquino@gmail.com" target="_blank">raquino@gmail.com</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Cc: </span>"<a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU" target="_blank">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a>" <<a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@listserv.syr.edu" target="_blank">NCSG-DISCUSS@listserv.syr.edu</a>>, NCUC-discuss <<a href="mailto:ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org" target="_blank">ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Subject: </span>Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] Panama Papers - privacy, data and media manipulation - Re: Information Internet<br>
</div><span class="">
<div><br>
</div>
<table lang="container" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" valign="top" style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:-webkit-standard;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;width:796px;margin-top:6px">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" style="padding-top:6px;line-height:1.31;color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<div><font>Hi,</font></div>
<div><font><br>
</font></div>
<div><font>Re: debate on privacy (though I prefer the term 'secrecy')</font></div>
<div><font><br>
</font></div>
<div><font>The fundamental<span> </span><i>human</i><span> </span>right to privacy is not the same as the 'right' to keep your crimes secret. I would also argue that 1) shell companies aren't humans
(though they might be persons in some territories), and 2) corruption thrives on secrecy. And because even a broken clock is right twice day, I will quote Michael Moore... “Openness, transparency — these are among the few weapons the citizenry has to protect
itself from the powerful and the corrupt”. </font></div>
<div><font><br>
</font></div>
<div><font>Ayden</font></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</span></span>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>