These comments are prepared with the aim of clarifying the contribution, insights, and context of the academic research we have done in the area of digital privacy.
这些评论的目的是澄清我们在数字隐私领域所做的学术研究的贡献、见解和背景。
{"title":"Comments on 'A Preliminary FTC Staff Report on Protecting Consumer Privacy in an Era of Rapid Change: A Proposed Framework for Businesses and Policymakers'","authors":"Avi Goldfarb, Catherine Tucker","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1743695","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1743695","url":null,"abstract":"These comments are prepared with the aim of clarifying the contribution, insights, and context of the academic research we have done in the area of digital privacy.","PeriodicalId":179517,"journal":{"name":"Information Privacy Law eJournal","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127906917","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article is Version 2.0 of this working paper and it examines the history of privacy enforcement by the Federal Trade Commission, including the FTC’s jurisdiction under Section 5, and its privacy enforcement matters, as well as the FTC's recently issued report, "Protecting Consumer Privacy in an Era of Rapid Change: A proposed Framework for Businesses and Policymakers", in which the FTC examines past enforcement models, noting their failings. In light of the FTC’s examination of past enforcement models, this article then analyzes these models, including the accountability-centric model that has previously been utilized in the United States, as well as the FTC’s proposed solution to the privacy problems of the Web 2.0 World--the adoption of best practices, including a "privacy by design" framework. The article then argues that the method to achieve the FTC’s goal of voluntary adoption of best practices is to focus on proportional protection for data based upon the sensitivity of the data in question, and to create a "safe harbor" from enforcement for businesses that choose to adopt the framework. This proposed framework could be linked in a meaningful way to existing EU processes, such as Binding Corporate Rules or the existing EU Safe Harbor program. By combining these elements, the FTC can achieve meaningful and focused self-regulation and provide appropriate protection to consumers, while giving business an incentive to adopt best-practices, and also increase the level of international cooperation regarding privacy.
{"title":"The Federal Trade Commission and Privacy: Defining Enforcement and Encouraging the Adoption of Best Practices - Version 2.0","authors":"A. Serwin","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1733217","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1733217","url":null,"abstract":"This article is Version 2.0 of this working paper and it examines the history of privacy enforcement by the Federal Trade Commission, including the FTC’s jurisdiction under Section 5, and its privacy enforcement matters, as well as the FTC's recently issued report, \"Protecting Consumer Privacy in an Era of Rapid Change: A proposed Framework for Businesses and Policymakers\", in which the FTC examines past enforcement models, noting their failings. In light of the FTC’s examination of past enforcement models, this article then analyzes these models, including the accountability-centric model that has previously been utilized in the United States, as well as the FTC’s proposed solution to the privacy problems of the Web 2.0 World--the adoption of best practices, including a \"privacy by design\" framework. The article then argues that the method to achieve the FTC’s goal of voluntary adoption of best practices is to focus on proportional protection for data based upon the sensitivity of the data in question, and to create a \"safe harbor\" from enforcement for businesses that choose to adopt the framework. This proposed framework could be linked in a meaningful way to existing EU processes, such as Binding Corporate Rules or the existing EU Safe Harbor program. By combining these elements, the FTC can achieve meaningful and focused self-regulation and provide appropriate protection to consumers, while giving business an incentive to adopt best-practices, and also increase the level of international cooperation regarding privacy.","PeriodicalId":179517,"journal":{"name":"Information Privacy Law eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129089599","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
What are the legal boundaries of an employee’s privacy in this interconnected, electronic-communication age, one in which thoughts and ideas that would have been spoken personally and privately in ages past are now instantly sent to friends and family via computer? This paper analyzes employee privacy rights in light of modern work-related monitoring and surveillance technologies and practices and the possible application of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) to those monitoring practices. The analysis in this paper demonstrates that employees have minimal work-related privacy rights. While the ECPA may provide some privacy protections for employees, due to rapid changes in technology, the extent of privacy protections are unclear and in flux. Until the ECPA can be modernized to take into account twenty-first century technologies, there will be no clear boundaries for employee privacy.
{"title":"Applying the Electronic Communications Privacy Act in the Workplace: Struggling to Keep Pace with Paradigm Shifts in Technology","authors":"R. Sprague","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1728197","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1728197","url":null,"abstract":"What are the legal boundaries of an employee’s privacy in this interconnected, electronic-communication age, one in which thoughts and ideas that would have been spoken personally and privately in ages past are now instantly sent to friends and family via computer? This paper analyzes employee privacy rights in light of modern work-related monitoring and surveillance technologies and practices and the possible application of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) to those monitoring practices. The analysis in this paper demonstrates that employees have minimal work-related privacy rights. While the ECPA may provide some privacy protections for employees, due to rapid changes in technology, the extent of privacy protections are unclear and in flux. Until the ECPA can be modernized to take into account twenty-first century technologies, there will be no clear boundaries for employee privacy.","PeriodicalId":179517,"journal":{"name":"Information Privacy Law eJournal","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133799127","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Resumo Identifica como objetivo da ciencia da informacao — a partir de BUSH — sanar a explosao informacional por meio da recuperacao da informacao disponivel; argumenta que o campo, embora venha problematizando a significacao dessa informacao, ainda coloca pouca enfase nos processos (exemplificados pela propriedade intelectual) que pre-determinam as informacoes disponiveis em um sistema. Sugere que a concepcao de ecologia informacional (SARACEVIC) pode ser relevante para recolocar a questao do acesso ao conhecimento, mas com ressalvas; e que nesse sentido o ambientalismo informacional (BOYLE) e os estudos sobre bens comuns intelectuais sao caminhos importantes para estudo. Palavras-chave acesso ao conhecimento; informacao disponivel; propriedade intelectual; ambientalismo informacional; bens comuns intelectuais Abstract The article identifies as an objective of information science – since BUSH – to remedy the informational explosion through the retrieval of available information; argues that although the field has been questioning the meaningfulness of this information, it still places little emphasis on the processes (such as intellectual property) that predetermine the information available in a system. It suggests that the conception of informational ecology (SARACEVIC) can be relevant to restate the issue of access to knowledge, but with reservations; and that, in that sense, informational environmentalism (BOYLE) and studies on intellectual commons are important research pathways. Keywords access to knowledge; available information; intellectual property; informational environmentalism; intellectual commons.
{"title":"A informação disponível como pressuposto tácito da recuperação na ciência da informação moderna (Available Information as a Tacit Precondition of Retrieval in Modern Information Science)","authors":"Miguel Said Vieira","doi":"10.18617/liinc.v6i2.357","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18617/liinc.v6i2.357","url":null,"abstract":"Resumo Identifica como objetivo da ciencia da informacao — a partir de BUSH — sanar a explosao informacional por meio da recuperacao da informacao disponivel; argumenta que o campo, embora venha problematizando a significacao dessa informacao, ainda coloca pouca enfase nos processos (exemplificados pela propriedade intelectual) que pre-determinam as informacoes disponiveis em um sistema. Sugere que a concepcao de ecologia informacional (SARACEVIC) pode ser relevante para recolocar a questao do acesso ao conhecimento, mas com ressalvas; e que nesse sentido o ambientalismo informacional (BOYLE) e os estudos sobre bens comuns intelectuais sao caminhos importantes para estudo. Palavras-chave acesso ao conhecimento; informacao disponivel; propriedade intelectual; ambientalismo informacional; bens comuns intelectuais Abstract The article identifies as an objective of information science – since BUSH – to remedy the informational explosion through the retrieval of available information; argues that although the field has been questioning the meaningfulness of this information, it still places little emphasis on the processes (such as intellectual property) that predetermine the information available in a system. It suggests that the conception of informational ecology (SARACEVIC) can be relevant to restate the issue of access to knowledge, but with reservations; and that, in that sense, informational environmentalism (BOYLE) and studies on intellectual commons are important research pathways. Keywords access to knowledge; available information; intellectual property; informational environmentalism; intellectual commons.","PeriodicalId":179517,"journal":{"name":"Information Privacy Law eJournal","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125346000","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This is a new approach to tokenize data which eliminates challenges associated with standard centralized tokenization. Particularly in high volume operations, the usual way of generating tokens is prone to issues that impact the availability and performance of the data. From a security standpoint, it is critical to address the issue of collisions caused when tokenization solutions assign the same token to two separate pieces of data. This next generation tokenization solution addresses all of these issues. System performance, availability and scaling are enhanced, numeric and alpha tokens are generated to protect a wide range of high-risk data, key management is greatly simplified, and collisions are eliminated. This new approach has the potential to change where tokenization can be used.
{"title":"A New Scalable Approach to Data Tokenization","authors":"Ulf T. Mattsson","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1627284","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1627284","url":null,"abstract":"This is a new approach to tokenize data which eliminates challenges associated with standard centralized tokenization. Particularly in high volume operations, the usual way of generating tokens is prone to issues that impact the availability and performance of the data. From a security standpoint, it is critical to address the issue of collisions caused when tokenization solutions assign the same token to two separate pieces of data. This next generation tokenization solution addresses all of these issues. System performance, availability and scaling are enhanced, numeric and alpha tokens are generated to protect a wide range of high-risk data, key management is greatly simplified, and collisions are eliminated. This new approach has the potential to change where tokenization can be used.","PeriodicalId":179517,"journal":{"name":"Information Privacy Law eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129939908","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Deep packet inspection is a technology which enables the examination of the content of information packets being sent over the Internet. The Internet was originally set up using “end-to-end connectivity” as part of its design, allowing nodes of the network to send packets to all other nodes of the network, without requiring intermediate network elements to maintain status information about the transmission. In this way, the Internet was created as a “dumb” network, with “intelligent” devices (such as personal computers) at the end or “last mile” of the network. The dumb network does not interfere with an application's operation, nor is it sensitive to the needs of an application, and as such it treats all information sent over it as (more or less) equal. Yet, deep packet inspection allows the examination of packets at places on the network which are not endpoints, In practice, this permits entities such as Internet service providers (ISPs) or governments to observe the content of the information being sent, and perhaps even manipulate it. Indeed, the existence and implementation of deep packet inspection may challenge profoundly the egalitarian and open character of the Internet. This paper will firstly elaborate on what deep packet inspection is and how it works from a technological perspective, before going on to examine how it is being used in practice by governments and corporations. Legal problems have already been created by the use of deep packet inspection, which involve fundamental rights (especially of Internet users), such as freedom of expression and privacy, as well as more economic concerns, such as competition and copyright. These issues will be considered, and an assessment of the conformity of the use of deep packet inspection with law will be made. There will be a concentration on the use of deep packet inspection in European and North American jurisdictions, where it has already provoked debate, particularly in the context of discussions on net neutrality. This paper will also incorporate a more fundamental assessment of the values that are desirable for the Internet to respect and exhibit (such as openness, equality and neutrality), before concluding with the formulation of a legal and regulatory response to the use of this technology, in accordance with these values.
{"title":"The Legality of Deep Packet Inspection","authors":"A. Daly","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1628024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1628024","url":null,"abstract":"Deep packet inspection is a technology which enables the examination of the content of information packets being sent over the Internet. The Internet was originally set up using “end-to-end connectivity” as part of its design, allowing nodes of the network to send packets to all other nodes of the network, without requiring intermediate network elements to maintain status information about the transmission. In this way, the Internet was created as a “dumb” network, with “intelligent” devices (such as personal computers) at the end or “last mile” of the network. The dumb network does not interfere with an application's operation, nor is it sensitive to the needs of an application, and as such it treats all information sent over it as (more or less) equal. Yet, deep packet inspection allows the examination of packets at places on the network which are not endpoints, In practice, this permits entities such as Internet service providers (ISPs) or governments to observe the content of the information being sent, and perhaps even manipulate it. Indeed, the existence and implementation of deep packet inspection may challenge profoundly the egalitarian and open character of the Internet. \u0000 \u0000This paper will firstly elaborate on what deep packet inspection is and how it works from a technological perspective, before going on to examine how it is being used in practice by governments and corporations. Legal problems have already been created by the use of deep packet inspection, which involve fundamental rights (especially of Internet users), such as freedom of expression and privacy, as well as more economic concerns, such as competition and copyright. These issues will be considered, and an assessment of the conformity of the use of deep packet inspection with law will be made. There will be a concentration on the use of deep packet inspection in European and North American jurisdictions, where it has already provoked debate, particularly in the context of discussions on net neutrality. This paper will also incorporate a more fundamental assessment of the values that are desirable for the Internet to respect and exhibit (such as openness, equality and neutrality), before concluding with the formulation of a legal and regulatory response to the use of this technology, in accordance with these values.","PeriodicalId":179517,"journal":{"name":"Information Privacy Law eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133723482","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This report is one of 11 country reports produced for the "New Challenges to Data Protection" study, commissioned by the European Commission, and describes the ways in which German data protection law addresses the challenges posed by the new social-technical-political environment described in Working Paper No. 1, by Dr Ian Brown.NB: The final report, an executive summary of the final report, both by Douwe Korff and Ian Brown (et al), and one of two working papers, as well as two further country reports (on France and the UK) and a Comparative Chart, all by Douwe Korff, all also produced for the New Challenges study, can be found separately on the present ssrn page. The other working paper, by Ian Brown, can be found on his ssrn page: http://ssrn.com/author=892424.
{"title":"New Challenges to Data Protection Study - Country Report: Germany","authors":"D. Korff","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1638959","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1638959","url":null,"abstract":"This report is one of 11 country reports produced for the \"New Challenges to Data Protection\" study, commissioned by the European Commission, and describes the ways in which German data protection law addresses the challenges posed by the new social-technical-political environment described in Working Paper No. 1, by Dr Ian Brown.NB: The final report, an executive summary of the final report, both by Douwe Korff and Ian Brown (et al), and one of two working papers, as well as two further country reports (on France and the UK) and a Comparative Chart, all by Douwe Korff, all also produced for the New Challenges study, can be found separately on the present ssrn page. The other working paper, by Ian Brown, can be found on his ssrn page: http://ssrn.com/author=892424.","PeriodicalId":179517,"journal":{"name":"Information Privacy Law eJournal","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114886526","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This the second of two working papers produced for the "New Challenges to Data Protection" study, commissioned by the European Commission. This paper discusses the difficulties that arise if one tries to apply the main EC Directive on data protection (Directive 95/46/EC) and the data protection laws in the EU Member States that implement it, as currently drafted, to the new global social and technical context described in Working Paper No. 1, by Dr. Ian Brown. It does this by means of a comparative-legal analysis, taking into account the six European and five non-European countries studied: Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, United Kingdom, USA (Federal, California and New Jersey), Australia, Hong Kong, India and Japan. NB: Working Paper No. 1, on "The Challenges to European Data Protection Laws and Principles," can be found on Ian Brown's ssrn webpage: http://ssrn.com/author=892424. The findings of the paper presented here are summarised in another document: "Comparative Chart: Divergencies Between Data Protection Laws in the EU," which can be separately downloaded from the present ssrn page, as can the country reports on France, Germany and the UK, also written by Douwe Korff.
{"title":"New Challenges to Data Protection Study - Working Paper No. 2: Data Protection Laws in the EU: The Difficulties in Meeting the Challenges Posed by Global Social and Technical Developments","authors":"D. Korff","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1638949","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1638949","url":null,"abstract":"This the second of two working papers produced for the \"New Challenges to Data Protection\" study, commissioned by the European Commission. This paper discusses the difficulties that arise if one tries to apply the main EC Directive on data protection (Directive 95/46/EC) and the data protection laws in the EU Member States that implement it, as currently drafted, to the new global social and technical context described in Working Paper No. 1, by Dr. Ian Brown. It does this by means of a comparative-legal analysis, taking into account the six European and five non-European countries studied: Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, United Kingdom, USA (Federal, California and New Jersey), Australia, Hong Kong, India and Japan. NB: Working Paper No. 1, on \"The Challenges to European Data Protection Laws and Principles,\" can be found on Ian Brown's ssrn webpage: http://ssrn.com/author=892424. The findings of the paper presented here are summarised in another document: \"Comparative Chart: Divergencies Between Data Protection Laws in the EU,\" which can be separately downloaded from the present ssrn page, as can the country reports on France, Germany and the UK, also written by Douwe Korff.","PeriodicalId":179517,"journal":{"name":"Information Privacy Law eJournal","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126411288","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article focuses on five recent judgments of the ECJ and CFI: ProMusicae, Varec, Pergan, Bavarian Lager and Satamedia. Taking as its starting-point the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) on Article 8 ECHR and on Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the author considers how the Community Courts have approached the protection of privacy in the economic sphere (i.e. as regards matters relating to undertakings within the meaning of Arts. 81 and 82 EC and the economic aspects of the lives of natural persons) in the various relevant sectors, especially: data protection, the protection of business and other professional secrets, defamation and inspections (Hoechst and Roquette). Within each of these sectors, particular attention is paid to the specific provisions and case law relating to competition. Inevitably, the inherent tension between the protection of privacy and the principle of transparency repeatedly comes to the fore. Generally speaking, the author welcomes the approach taken by the Community courts, notably their increased emphasis on fundamental rights. However, he claims that, where the case law of the ECtHR is uncertain, this emphasis has at times occurred at the expense of the uniformity of Community law and even of legal certaintly - a development which is of particular concern when the unity of the internal market is at stake. The judgments in ProMusicae and Satamedia are then criticized in this regard.
本文主要关注欧洲法院和原讼法庭最近的五个判决:ProMusicae, Varec, Pergan, Bavarian Lager和Satamedia。以作为其出发点欧洲人权法院的判例法确立)第八条ECHR和文章7和8的基本权利宪章》,作者认为社区法院如何走近隐私保护在经济领域(例如,至于有关事业在艺术的意义。81年和82年电子商务和经济方面的自然人的生命)在各种相关领域,尤其是:数据保护、商业和其他专业秘密保护、诽谤和检查(Hoechst and Roquette)。在每一个部门内，都特别注意与竞争有关的具体规定和判例法。不可避免地，保护隐私和透明度原则之间的内在紧张关系一再出现。总的来说，发件人欢迎共同体法院所采取的办法，特别是它们更加强调基本权利。然而，他声称，在欧洲人权法院的判例法不确定的情况下，这种强调有时是以牺牲共同体法律的统一性，甚至是法律上的统一性为代价的- -当内部市场的统一性受到威胁时，这种发展是特别令人关切的。ProMusicae和Satamedia的判决在这方面受到了批评。
{"title":"The Protection of Privacy in the Economic Sphere Before the European Court of Justice","authors":"Peter Oliver","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2394179","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2394179","url":null,"abstract":"This article focuses on five recent judgments of the ECJ and CFI: ProMusicae, Varec, Pergan, Bavarian Lager and Satamedia. Taking as its starting-point the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) on Article 8 ECHR and on Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the author considers how the Community Courts have approached the protection of privacy in the economic sphere (i.e. as regards matters relating to undertakings within the meaning of Arts. 81 and 82 EC and the economic aspects of the lives of natural persons) in the various relevant sectors, especially: data protection, the protection of business and other professional secrets, defamation and inspections (Hoechst and Roquette). Within each of these sectors, particular attention is paid to the specific provisions and case law relating to competition. Inevitably, the inherent tension between the protection of privacy and the principle of transparency repeatedly comes to the fore. Generally speaking, the author welcomes the approach taken by the Community courts, notably their increased emphasis on fundamental rights. However, he claims that, where the case law of the ECtHR is uncertain, this emphasis has at times occurred at the expense of the uniformity of Community law and even of legal certaintly - a development which is of particular concern when the unity of the internal market is at stake. The judgments in ProMusicae and Satamedia are then criticized in this regard.","PeriodicalId":179517,"journal":{"name":"Information Privacy Law eJournal","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122123856","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
J. Turow, J. King, C. Hoofnagle, A. Bleakley, Michael Hennessy
This nationally representative telephone (wire-line and cell phone) survey explores Americans' opinions about behavioral targeting by marketers, a controversial issue currently before government policymakers. Behavioral targeting involves two types of activities: following users' actions and then tailoring advertisements for the users based on those actions. While privacy advocates have lambasted behavioral targeting for tracking and labeling people in ways they do not know or understand, marketers have defended the practice by insisting it gives Americans what they want: advertisements and other forms of content that are as relevant to their lives as possible.Contrary to what many marketers claim, most adult Americans (66%) do not want marketers to tailor advertisements to their interests. Moreover, when Americans are informed of three common ways that marketers gather data about people in order to tailor ads, even higher percentages - between 73% and 86% - say they would not want such advertising. Even among young adults, whom advertisers often portray as caring little about information privacy, more than half (55%) of 18-24 years-old do not want tailored advertising. And contrary to consistent assertions of marketers, young adults have as strong an aversion to being followed across websites and offline (for example, in stores) as do older adults.This survey finds that Americans want openness with marketers. If marketers want to continue to use various forms of behavioral targeting in their interactions with Americans, they must work with policymakers to open up the process so that individuals can learn exactly how their information is being collected and used, and then exercise control over their data. We offer specific proposals in this direction. An overarching one is for marketers to implement a regime of information respect toward the public rather than to treat them as objects from which they can take information in order to optimally persuade them.
{"title":"Americans Reject Tailored Advertising and Three Activities that Enable It","authors":"J. Turow, J. King, C. Hoofnagle, A. Bleakley, Michael Hennessy","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1478214","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1478214","url":null,"abstract":"This nationally representative telephone (wire-line and cell phone) survey explores Americans' opinions about behavioral targeting by marketers, a controversial issue currently before government policymakers. Behavioral targeting involves two types of activities: following users' actions and then tailoring advertisements for the users based on those actions. While privacy advocates have lambasted behavioral targeting for tracking and labeling people in ways they do not know or understand, marketers have defended the practice by insisting it gives Americans what they want: advertisements and other forms of content that are as relevant to their lives as possible.Contrary to what many marketers claim, most adult Americans (66%) do not want marketers to tailor advertisements to their interests. Moreover, when Americans are informed of three common ways that marketers gather data about people in order to tailor ads, even higher percentages - between 73% and 86% - say they would not want such advertising. Even among young adults, whom advertisers often portray as caring little about information privacy, more than half (55%) of 18-24 years-old do not want tailored advertising. And contrary to consistent assertions of marketers, young adults have as strong an aversion to being followed across websites and offline (for example, in stores) as do older adults.This survey finds that Americans want openness with marketers. If marketers want to continue to use various forms of behavioral targeting in their interactions with Americans, they must work with policymakers to open up the process so that individuals can learn exactly how their information is being collected and used, and then exercise control over their data. We offer specific proposals in this direction. An overarching one is for marketers to implement a regime of information respect toward the public rather than to treat them as objects from which they can take information in order to optimally persuade them.","PeriodicalId":179517,"journal":{"name":"Information Privacy Law eJournal","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116169774","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：