A Theory of Pricing Private Data

Personal data has value to both its owner and to institutions who would like to analyze it. Privacy mechanisms protect the owner's data while releasing to analysts noisy versions of aggregate query results. But such strict protections of individual's data have not yet found wide use in practice. Instead, Internet companies, for example, commonly provide free services in return for valuable sensitive information from users, which they exploit and sometimes sell to third parties. As the awareness of the value of the personal data increases, so has the drive to compensate the end user for her private information. The idea of monetizing private data can improve over the narrower view of hiding private data, since it empowers individuals to control their data through financial means. In this paper we propose a theoretical framework for assigning prices to noisy query answers, as a function of their accuracy, and for dividing the price amongst data owners who deserve compensation for their loss of privacy. Our framework adopts and extends key principles from both differential privacy and query pricing in data markets. We identify essential properties of the price function and micro-payments, and characterize valid solutions.Comment: 25 pages, 2 figures. Best Paper Award, to appear in the 16th International Conference on Database Theory (ICDT), 201

Tactful Inattention: Erving Goffman, Privacy in the Digital Age, and the Virtue of Averting One\u27s Eyes

(Excerpt) This Article suggests that we would benefit if we would protect privacy by sometimes requiring tactful inattention by potential users rather than total secrecy by the target. That is, some legal privacy protections should stop emphasizing secrecy and instead emphasize the appropriate uses of personally identifiable and often sensitive information by gelling tactful inattention into legal standards. Culturally, such an expansion may be difficult, as we tend to a “finders-keepers” attitude towards data. However, given technology’s ability to dissolve routine barriers, if we require others to leave some information out of some equations, we may be able to retain the personal flourishing that privacy promotes, without unduly impairing the information needs of others. Not only has the tactful inattention paradigm already existed in some traditional areas of law, but it also has occurred in some new laws in specific areas of recent concern. Part I discusses the benefits to flourishing that privacy provides, both individually and within relationships. Part II describes the development of the tactful inattention paradigm in various areas of law. Part III suggests two specific areas that might benefit from a paradigm of tactful inattention: the use of certain behavioral information by employers to screen applicants and employees, and the use of similar information by political campaigns and vendors to target behavioral advertising and for vendors, micro-target pricing. Finally, Part IV describes the benefits of a tactful inattention approach to privacy in the digital age

How to Balance Privacy and Money through Pricing Mechanism in Personal Data Market

A personal data market is a platform including three participants: data owners (individuals), data buyers and market maker. Data owners who provide personal data are compensated according to their privacy loss. Data buyers can submit a query and pay for the result according to their desired accuracy. Market maker coordinates between data owner and buyer. This framework has been previously studied based on differential privacy. However, the previous study assumes data owners can accept any level of privacy loss and data buyers can conduct the transaction without regard to the financial budget. In this paper, we propose a practical personal data trading framework that is able to strike a balance between money and privacy. In order to gain insights on user preferences, we first conducted an online survey on human attitude to- ward privacy and interest in personal data trading. Second, we identify the 5 key principles of personal data market, which is important for designing a reasonable trading frame- work and pricing mechanism. Third, we propose a reason- able trading framework for personal data which provides an overview of how the data is traded. Fourth, we propose a balanced pricing mechanism which computes the query price for data buyers and compensation for data owners (whose data are utilized) as a function of their privacy loss. The main goal is to ensure a fair trading for both parties. Finally, we will conduct an experiment to evaluate the output of our proposed pricing mechanism in comparison with other previously proposed mechanism

Data Disparity: Tiered Pricing as an Alternative to Consumer IoT Data Privacy Regulations

In recent years, Internet of Things (IoT) devices have exploded on the consumer scene. These emerging products bring new technological capabilities into our everyday lives. IoT is projected to contribute anywhere from $4-11 trillion to the global economy and companies are investing billions of dollars into the technology. However, with the vast amount of data that IoT devices collect, consumers are burdening the risk of having their personal data breached or sold to third parties. This paper first identifies why consumers may be weary or willing towards providing their personal data and how unconscious biases in the purchasing process cause consumers to misperceive their level of risk. Then, the impact of potential regulations that may be enacted are analyzed. Finally, a study is conducted that tests consumers’ purchasing behavior around a smart speaker that is offered under a three-tier price model providing three different levels of data privacy. From this study, a two-tier price model is proposed as an effective measure towards ensuring greater equality in the personal data trade between consumers and sellers, and a proactive alternative to regulations that may create new challenges for both parties

Intellectual Property and Public Health – A White Paper

On October 26, 2012, the University of Akron School of Law’s Center for Intellectual Property and Technology hosted its Sixth Annual IP Scholars Forum. In attendance were thirteen legal scholars with expertise and an interest in IP and public health who met to discuss problems and potential solutions at the intersection of these fields. This report summarizes this discussion by describing the problems raised, areas of agreement and disagreement between the participants, suggestions and solutions made by participants and the subsequent evaluations of these suggestions and solutions. Led by the moderator, participants at the Forum focused generally on three broad questions. First, are there alternatives to either the patent system or specific patent doctrines that can provide or help provide sufficient incentives for health-related innovation? Second, is health information being used proprietarily and if so, is this type of protection appropriate? Third, does IP conflict with other non-IP values that are important in health and how does or can IP law help resolve these conflicts? This report addresses each of these questions in turn

Vulnerable Users’ Perceptions of Transport Technologies

As the global population continues to grow, age and urbanize, it is vital to provide accessible transport so that neither ageing nor disability constitute barriers to social inclusion. While technology can enhance urban access, there is a need to study the ways by which transport technologies - real-time information, pedestrian navigation, surveillance, and road pricing - could be more effectively adopted by users. The reason for this is that some people, and particularly vulnerable populations, are still likely to reluctantly use (or even avoid using) technologies perceived as 'unknown' and 'complicated'. Based on evidence from British and Swedish case studies on older people's perceptions of the aforementioned transport technologies, as well as on a Swedish case study of visually impaired people's perceptions, this article makes the case that technology is only one tool in a complex socio-technical system, and one which brings challenges. The authors also suggest that although vulnerable populations are not homogeneous when expressing attitudes towards transport technologies, their assessment criteria tend to be 'pro-social' as they usually consider that the societal benefits outweigh the personal benefits. Emphasising aspects linked to the technologies' pro-social potential or relevance to the individual user could increase acceptance

Shopping For Privacy: How Technology in Brick-and-Mortar Retail Stores Poses Privacy Risks for Shoppers

As technology continues to rapidly advance, the American legal system has failed to protect individual shoppers from the technology implemented into retail stores, which poses significant privacy risks but does not violate the law. In particular, I examine the technologies implemented into many brick-and-mortar stores today, many of which the average everyday shopper has no idea exists. This Article criticizes these technologies, suggesting that many, if not all of them, are questionable in their legality taking advantage of their status in a legal gray zone. Because the American judicial system cannot adequately protect the individual shopper from these questionable privacy practices, I call upon the Federal Trade Commission, the de facto privacy regulator in the United States, to increase its policing of physical retail stores to protect the shopper from any further harm

Privacy In The Smart Grid: An Information Flow Analysis

Project Final Report prepared for CIEE and California Energy Commissio