Privacy as a Public Good

Privacy is commonly studied as a private good: my personal data is mine to protect and control, and yours is yours. This conception of privacy misses an important component of the policy problem. An individual who is careless with data exposes not only extensive information about herself, but about others as well. The negative externalities imposed on nonconsenting outsiders by such carelessness can be productively studied in terms of welfare economics. If all relevant individuals maximize private benefit, and expect all other relevant individuals to do the same, neoclassical economic theory predicts that society will achieve a suboptimal level of privacy. This prediction holds even if all individuals cherish privacy with the same intensity. As the theoretical literature would have it, the struggle for privacy is destined to become a tragedy. But according to the experimental public-goods literature, there is hope. Like in real life, people in experiments cooperate in groups at rates well above those predicted by neoclassical theory. Groups can be aided in their struggle to produce public goods by institutions, such as communication, framing, or sanction. With these institutions, communities can manage public goods without heavy-handed government intervention. Legal scholarship has not fully engaged this problem in these terms. In this Article, we explain why privacy has aspects of a public good, and we draw lessons from both the theoretical and the empirical literature on public goods to inform the policy discourse on privacy

Not interesting enough to be followed by the NSA: An analysis of Dutch privacy attitudes

Open curtains and a careless attitude. The Dutch are described as holding an indifferent stance towards privacy in the aftermath of Snowden’s revelations of far-reaching government surveillance. But are Dutch reactions as aloof as often claimed? This study provides an in-depth overview of privacy attitudes in the Dutch debate about the National Security Agency (NSA) leaks, showing a greater variety of sentiments than anticipated. A qualitative frame analysis and a quantitative descriptive analysis resulted in six frames, which convey distinct privacy attitudes. Online and offline as well as professional and non-journalistic content in the debate displays a different distribution of frames. The frames, ranging from an “End justifies the means” attitude to an anxious fear of an “Orwellian dystopia”, are placed in a larger framework as the research demonstrates the connection to existing theories about privacy and surveillance. Dutch discussions about the NSA revelations often display a trade-off narrative balancing safety against privacy, and include (de)legitimisation strategies. These outcomes are in line with previous studies about mediated surveillance debates, which indicates that privacy attitudes transcend national boundaries. However, the inclusion of user-generated content adds an individual dimension to the existing body of research and reveals a personal perspective on surveillance issues

Analysis and Implementation of Policy Inference of Uploaded Images on Networking Sites

Human or user increase in the usage of social networking through various platforms by sharing their images increased a need for developing more secure systems which help user to share information among groups or people that he or she authorizes without causing any security issues in future. People can then share their desired images by applying different settings on the image such as who can view the image, who can download the image etc., and least bother about the privacy. To solve the privacy problem of excessive and careless sharing of images and information by users, this paper analyzes and describes a privacy policy development system that helps users to create new privacy settings for the images they share and helps in reducing the security breach or fraud over internet. It also helps the user by providing individual settings to all the images they share individually. Depending on the user history on the sharing site, the system proposes a policy in which the user can approve or make changes to the privacy prediction. Polices are thus improved afterwards in time with all the user inputs. Along with the description, this paper also presents a part of implementation of the system

Unknowable bodies, unthinkable sexualities: lesbian and transgender legal invisibility in the Toronto women's bathhouse raid

Although litigation involving sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination claims has generated considerable public attention in recent years, lesbian and transgender bodies and sexualities still remain largely invisible in Anglo-American courts. While such invisibility is generally attributed to social norms that fail to recognize lesbian and transgender experiences, the capacity to 'not see' or 'not know' queer bodies and sexualities also involves wilful acts of ignorance. Drawing from R. v Hornick (2002) a Canadian case involving the police raid of a women's bathhouse, this article explores how lesbian and transgender bodies and sexualities are actively rendered invisible via legal knowledge practices, norms and rationalities. It argues that limited knowledge and limited thinking not only regulate the borders of visibility and belonging, but play an active part in shaping identities, governing conduct and producing subjectivity

Control responsibility : the discursive construction of privacy, teens, and Facebook in Flemish newspapers

This study explores the discursive construction of online privacy through a critical discourse analysis of Flemish newspapers' coverage of privacy, teens, and Facebook between 2007 and 2018 to determine what representation of (young) users the papers articulate. A privacy-as-control discourse is dominant and complemented by two other discourses: that of the unconcerned and reckless teenager and that of the promise of media literacy. Combined, these discourses form an authoritative language on privacy that we call "control responsibility." Control responsibility presents privacy as an individual responsibility that can be controlled and needs to be learned by young users. We argue that the discourses contribute to a neoliberal rationality and have a disciplinary effect that strengthens various forms of responsibilization

Assurance Views of Testimony

Assurance theories of testimony attempt to explain what is distinctive about testimony as a form of epistemic warrant or justification. The most characteristic assurance theories hold that a distinctive subclass of assertion (acts of “telling”) involves a real commitment given by the speaker to the listener, somewhat like a promise to the effect that what is asserted is true. This chapter sympathetically explains what is attractive about such theories: instead of treating testimony as essentially similar to any other kind of evidence, they instead make testimonial warrant depend on essential features of the speech act of testimony as a social practice. One such feature is “buck-passing,” the phenomenon that when I am challenged to defend a belief I acquired through testimony, I may respond by referring to the source of my testimony (and thereby “passing the buck”) rather than providing direct evidence for the truth of the content of the belief. The chapter concludes by posing a serious challenge to assurance theories, namely that the social practice of assurance insufficiently ensures the truth of beliefs formed on the basis of testimony, and thereby fails a crucial epistemological test as a legitimate source of beliefs

Truth, Lies, and Stolen Valor: A Case For Protecting False Statements of Fact Under the First Amendment

The Stolen Valor Act of 2005 (the Act) makes it a crime to lie about having received a medal authorized by Congress for the military. In 2010, in United States v. Alvarez, the Ninth Circuit found the Act unconstitutional under the First Amendment, holding that false statements of fact, like other content-based restrictions on speech, are subject to strict scrutiny. The Act failed this test because, according to the court, it was not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest. The decision highlights the uncertainty of First Amendment protections for false speech. Though the Supreme Court has held that certain categories of false speech— such as fraud and defamation—are proscribable, it has not ruled directly on a case in which false speech had been barred without respect to context, intent, or harm. This Note argues that false speech should be presumptively protected by the First Amendment, with exceptions for certain classes of speech that result in concrete harm to individuals. Such protection would limit government control of speech, avoid chilling worthy speech, promote privacy and autonomy, and result in easier administration for courts

Cities and Drones: What Cities Need to Know about Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs)

NLC's municipal guide, Cities and Drones, is designed to serve as a primer on drones for local officials, providing insight into the recently released federal rules relating to drone operation, as well as offering suggestions for how local governments can craft their own drone ordinances to encourage innovation while also protecting their cities.Drones have the potential to revolutionize many industries and city services, particularly as their technology advances. There are many applications for drones within the public sector at the local and state level. Drones can be used for law enforcement and firefighting, as rural ambulances, and for inspections, environmental monitoring, and disaster management. Any commercial arena that involves outdoor photography or visual inspection will likely be experimenting with drones in the near future, as will retailers who want to speed up package delivery.However, drones also present challenges. There are some safety issues, for instance, when operators fly their drones over people or near planes. City residents often have privacy concerns when any small device hovering nearby could potentially be taking photos or video. The FAA's final rule on drones left some opportunity for city governments to legislate on this issue. Rather than ban them outright, city officials should consider how this new technology might serve residents or enhance city services