Outsourcing Pet Owner Privacy for Profit (crossposted)

http://bluedogstate .blogspot. com:80/

Outsourcing Pet Owner Privacy for Profit 
 
Lloyd Levine’s mandatory castration proposal could lead to record corporate 
profits — pet owners are in the cross hairs.
 
Has your personal information been databanked ?
 
Read it and weep, California pet owners. Last week we did a little 
speculating on enforcement strategies for Lloyd Levine’s radical proposal to 
surgically sterilize every single pet dog and cat in the entire state of California.
 
But that was then, and this is now. The beat goes on.
 
The Mother of All Databases is already a reality
 
PetData Inc., a private corporation in Irving, Texas, already collects 
information on law-abiding citizens who happen to own pets. They say they have 
already databanked information on 2 million residents in more than 20 U. S. 
communities, and four entire counties. Matthews, North Carolina, just joined the 
ranks of municipalities contracts with PetData.
 
Your personal privacy on the auction block
 
If you live in a community that out sourced animal licensing functions to 
PetData, you may not even realize it yet. When you vaccinate your cats and dogs 
for rabies, your vet forwards the details to PetData Inc.
 
Your name, your address, your contact information. And your dog’s, or cat’s, 
veterinary information- -including reproductive status. It all goes into 
for-profit PetData Inc.’s privately-owned, privately-controlled database.
 
PetData proudly advertises its membership in the Humane Society of the 
United States. It has no corporate privacy policy.
 
From rabies vaccination to Animal Control at the door –two shakes of a 
lamb’s tail!
 
These California communities already contract with PetData–
 
a.. Antioch 
b.. Dana Point 
c.. Fairfield 
d.. Oakland 
e.. Riverside 
f.. San Clemente 
g.. San Luis Obispo 
h.. Torrance 
i.. Vacaville 
j.. Vallejo 
k.. County of San Luis Obispo 
l.. County of Solano
If you live in one of these California municipalities or counties, your 
local elected officials struck a deal with PetData. For a modest fee, PetData is 
doing the animal licensing enforcement for your community. If you vaccinate 
an unlicensed pet, you’re going to hear from PetData. 
 
But it gets better.
 
PetData can kick back and watch the profits roll in.
 
Matthews, North Carolina, is paying them $3.75 for each one year license 
they collect on.
 
That’s just the beginning.
 
Its the aftermarket sales that are going to be most valuable to PetData.
 
Insurance companies, landlords, breed bigots, pet supply marketers. . .Gonad 
Nazis
 
PetData is building itself one hell of a marketable databank. Not just for 
California, either. Check out the website. Albuquerque signed a five year 
contract with PetData.
 
But in a world where greed is good. . . who cares? Its the American way. 
Plus, your dog or cat is already neutered. You’re not breaking any laws. Life is 
good. Right?
 
Wrong.
 
The New York Times reports that its virtually impossible to find housing in 
Manhattan–where housing vacancy rates hover in the very low single digits– 
if your household includes a dog that weighs over 20 lbs. If you’ve got more 
than one dog or cat? Fudge about it.
 
Gawd knows insurance companies are itching to drop dog owners. They just 
have to find ‘em.
 
But Gonad Nazis on a mission ? Oooh, baby! PetData is marketing the reports 
it can run from the data it collects. Need a list of households with intact 
dogs or cats in Riverside, California? Shazaam!
 
Not paranoia. Not a conspiracy theory. They are coming for you. And certain 
sensitive parts of your pets.
 
The Humane Society of the United States, the largest, wealthiest animal 
extremist organization in the country–one that is dedicated to eliminating pet 
ownership– is already using PetData as a mouthpiece.
 
Will municipalities increasingly outsource law enforcement responsibilities 
to profit-motivated private organizations? Ones with no public 
accountability?
 
As a private corporation, PetData’s employees are responsible to their own 
Board of Directors. We the People don’t get to vote on what they do, or how 
they do it.
 
Meanwhile, back at the Nanny-State nursery
 
Poor, clueless Lloyd Levine.
 
Levine — the pro-choice Democrat, representing a pro-choice constituency in 
a pro-choice state — who wants to deny pet owners any choices.
 
Levine-the-liberal — now turned animal extremist poop-boy– intent on 
bringing fascism to the homes of California dog and cat owners.
 
Maybe freedom of choice and the right to privacy really don’t matter to 
Lloyd Levine. Or maybe he thinks its okay to deny these liberties to “certain 
people”, like pet-owning Californians.
 
But I’m thinking the 60+ percent of Californians that own cats and dogs 
would kick his butt from one end of the state to the other if they knew what AB 
1634 really means to them, and to the pets they love. 
 

Some interesting reading

http://www.rexano.org//AnimalLicensingFrame.htm

http://www.petpac.net