Font Size: AAA // Print // Bookmark

Comment for Proposed Rule 83 FR 63450

  • From: Sharadin McWhorter
    Organization(s):
    U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission

    Comment No: 61905
    Date: 12/13/2018

    Comment Text:

    I agree with this proposed rule. I agree with it because in some ways it is making the rules that the company has to follow for the privacy for their customers more strict, and when it is making it less strict it is not in a way that makes a whole lot of difference. One of the proposed rule changes is to make the guidelines of when a Covered Person has to give the customer they have a relationship with a privacy notice. One of these guidelines is that if the privacy rule is changed more than a specific amount the Covered Person must submit a notice to the customer and it has to be within 100 days. This will help protect the customers privacy, and help make sure they understand what they are getting into, and help make sure they cannot be duped in the future. As US citizens we have a right to privacy as guaranteed by the fourth amendment. This rule change will help further guarantee privacy for the customers and if they do not want the privacy, knowledge of what they are sharing. Privacy was further guaranteed in Roe v. Wade when privacy was given to a women who wants an abortion. This shows that privacy is an important thing in America and these guidelines will help ensure it. Another change this rule proposes is to not force the COvered People to submit an annual privacy notice if they meet certain guidelines like has not changed in the past year. If the privacy rule has not changed in a year and the customer has previously gotten a notice for it, there is no need to give them another notice. All in all, I believe this is a good and non harmful rule change.

Edit
No records to display.