We write a lot at Reason about the
perils
of occupational liscensing—how it serves as a barrier to entry
for many otherwise qualified hair
braiders or horse
masseuses or
costumed superheroes; how it’s often based on
little more than protectionism for those already in an
industry; how it further bloats the regulatory state. Add another
negative to the list: It can make people’s private information a
matter of official record, and thus fair game for public records
requests. In some industries, such as those involving adult
entertainment, you can see how this may get a little
touchy.
Dancers and managers at a Washington state strip club are now
suing to stop their county from releasing their names, photos, and
other identifying information to a man who has filed a public
records request for it. The complaint, filed in U.S. District Court
in Tacoma Tuesday, says the Pierce County Auditor’s Office received
a request from David A. Van Vleet for copies of all adult
entertainment licenses on file for Dreamgirls at
Fox’s. Why does this man want identifying info on
current and former dancers at the Tacoma-based strip club? Nobody
knows. (I reached out to Van Vleet yesterday but haven’t heard
back.) But because strippers in most areas of Washington must
obtain an “entertainer’s license”, their identities are a matter of
public record.
Attorney Gilbert H. Levy acknowledged that the information was
technically fair game under the state Public Records Act, but said
the privacy and safety interests of strip club workers necessitates
keeping their real names and identities confidential. “It’s a
unique occupation and it’s a controversial occupation,”
Levy told CBS Seattle. “Some people like nude dancers, and
other people for religious or for other philosophical reasons
don’t. There’s some stigma attached to the occupation, and most
dancers for personal privacy reasons and safety reasons, don’t want
the customers to know who they are outside of the club.”
In other words, it’s entirely likely the person who wants this
information is a crazy stalker or an anti-sex nutjob. Maybe both.
Maybe merely a blackmailer or a 4chan-er. At any rate, it’s hard to
imagine many non-nefarious reasons for requesting personal
information on a wide swath of individuals in a sensitive
job.
Pierce County Auditor Julie Anderson told CBS it wasn’t her
office’s job “to interpret what the requester’s intentions might
be.” And that’s legit. That’s a key part of government
transparency, in fact, that random administrators can’t
subjectively block public records requests. There’s just no reason
these women’s identities should be a matter of public record in the
first place. There’s no reason city or county or state governments
need a stripper database.
This isn’t the first time Pierce County, Washington, has faced a
conundrum concerning stripper record requests. In 2013 a man who
had been arrested for stalking and was serving time in jail for
assault sought information on area strippers—hoping, he says, to
proposition them about using his marketing expertise to become
social media stars. According to Seattle-based Komo 4 News, the
man, Robert
Hill, received around 100 dancer files—including their names,
addresses, and phone numbers—from the county before strip club
workers sued to block him from receiving any more
records.
from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/1ugbM5p
via IFTTT