同意,背景正义和模式隐私原则

IF 2.5 2区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Political Studies Pub Date : 2023-04-27 DOI:10.1177/00323217231167074
Molly Powell
{"title":"同意,背景正义和模式隐私原则","authors":"Molly Powell","doi":"10.1177/00323217231167074","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Notice and consent approaches, being the most prevalent legal frameworks, have in recent years come under fire. I suggest they fail because they rest on a historical approach to privacy justice, whereby the justice of a particular state of affairs is a function of whether each transaction on the way was just. Instead, I make use of a background justice framing. Even where consent is present it is inadequate to secure the values at stake. When we only assess the fairness or freedom of individual information transactions, we fail to see the way many can undercut the very values we seek to secure by requiring consent for disclosures in the first place. I propose a patterned principle to regulate the distribution of individual control over privacy, and to set the background against which individual notice and consent can still play a role, albeit a limited one.","PeriodicalId":51379,"journal":{"name":"Political Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Consent, Background Justice and Patterned Privacy Principles\",\"authors\":\"Molly Powell\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00323217231167074\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Notice and consent approaches, being the most prevalent legal frameworks, have in recent years come under fire. I suggest they fail because they rest on a historical approach to privacy justice, whereby the justice of a particular state of affairs is a function of whether each transaction on the way was just. Instead, I make use of a background justice framing. Even where consent is present it is inadequate to secure the values at stake. When we only assess the fairness or freedom of individual information transactions, we fail to see the way many can undercut the very values we seek to secure by requiring consent for disclosures in the first place. I propose a patterned principle to regulate the distribution of individual control over privacy, and to set the background against which individual notice and consent can still play a role, albeit a limited one.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51379,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Political Studies\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Political Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00323217231167074\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00323217231167074","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

通知和同意方法作为最普遍的法律框架,近年来受到了抨击。我认为它们之所以失败,是因为它们建立在隐私正义的历史方法之上,根据这种方法,特定事务状态的公正性取决于途中的每一笔交易是否公正。相反,我利用了背景正义框架。即使存在同意,也不足以确保所涉价值。当我们只评估个人信息交易的公平性或自由性时,我们没有看到许多人会通过首先要求披露同意来削弱我们所寻求的价值观。我提出了一个模式化的原则,以规范个人对隐私控制的分配,并设定个人通知和同意仍然可以发挥作用的背景,尽管作用有限。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Consent, Background Justice and Patterned Privacy Principles
Notice and consent approaches, being the most prevalent legal frameworks, have in recent years come under fire. I suggest they fail because they rest on a historical approach to privacy justice, whereby the justice of a particular state of affairs is a function of whether each transaction on the way was just. Instead, I make use of a background justice framing. Even where consent is present it is inadequate to secure the values at stake. When we only assess the fairness or freedom of individual information transactions, we fail to see the way many can undercut the very values we seek to secure by requiring consent for disclosures in the first place. I propose a patterned principle to regulate the distribution of individual control over privacy, and to set the background against which individual notice and consent can still play a role, albeit a limited one.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Political Studies
Political Studies POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
3.20%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: Political Studies is a leading international journal committed to the very highest standards of peer review that publishes academically rigorous and original work in all fields of politics and international relations. The editors encourage a pluralistic approach to political science and debate across the discipline. Political Studies aims to develop the most promising new work available and to facilitate professional communication in political science.
期刊最新文献
The Group Appeal Strategy: Beyond the Policy Perspective on Party Electoral Success Citizen-Led Democratic Change: How Australia’s Community Independents Movement Is Reshaping Representative Democracy The Voter Next Door: Stigma Effects on Advance Voting for Radical Right Parties Exploring the Causes of Technocratic Minister Appointments in Europe Keeping Up With the Joneses? Neighbourhood Effects on the Vote
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1