On the WorldWideWeb, a huge distinction exists between a passive internet user and an active one. Certain circumstances have more or less likelihood when applied to an active or passive user. With the advent of the SocialWeb, the users of the web have become divided into basically two groups: passive and active users. A "passive user" is a user who does not participate in social activities, or does so very rarely. They may search for information, using search engines like Google to find various things. These users may post blog comments once in a while, but not very often at all. Many do not have much knowledge of how the Internet or programming works, and merely rely on the web as a tool to find more information about a given topic. Passive users have a better case for privacy rights, because they are not defaming anyone, nor are they committing any crime in most countries. In addition, they have done nothing to anyone else, so search engines have no reason to examine their search logs for what passive users were searching for. This is a privacy violation which has no justification.

Passive users are often merely visitors to other web pages, and are not harmful at all. They have no defamatory intent, and mostly do not even involve themselves in activities that anyone on the Internet can notice. Thus, it is a privacy violation for a search engine to look at search terms entered by certain IP addresses of people who are just looking for information, and then give that information to police to get that person convicted of a crime. This is completely unethical and wrong, in my opinion.

Active users are people who actively involve themselves in social or participatory activities on the InterNet. Such people are not automatically at risk. However, anonymous active users have less of a claim for privacy violations when certain things happen to them. Defamation on the internet is a large concern, and people must take excessive caution when posting on the InterNet about people who use their RealNames. For example (a real-life one), if an anonymous blogger (an active user) posts pictures of a model alongside personal commentary that attempts to convince the reader of her sexual promiscuity. The blog was in extremely bad taste, and the blogger turned out to be someone that the model personally knew. This blogger could have been sued for defamation, and if his/her name was revealed, they could not claim a privacy violation. This distinction is extremely important with the advent of Web 2.0. Thus, active users should be careful what they say about other people over the WorldWideWeb. Cyberspace does not exempt people from accountability for their actions. --JonasDaltonRand