Privacy exchanges: restoring consent in privacy self-management

Ethics and Information Technology 19 (1):39-48 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article reviews the qualitative changes that big data technology introduced to society, particularly changes that affect how individuals control the access, use and retention of their personal data. In particular interest is whether the practice of privacy self-management in this new context could still ensure the informed consent of individuals to the privacy terms of big data companies. It is concluded that that accepting big data companies’ privacy policies falls short of the disclosure and understanding requirements for informed consent. The article argues that the practice of privacy self-management could remain viable if the review, understanding and acceptance of privacy agreements is streamlined, standardized and automated. Technology should be employed to counter the privacy problems created by big data technology. The creation of the privacy exchange authorities is proposed as a solution to the failures of privacy self-management. The PEA are intermediaries that empower individuals to define their own privacy terms and express informed consent in their dealings with data companies. They will create the technological infrastructure for individuals to select their own privacy terms from a list of standard choices, potentially only once. The PEA will further mediate the delivery and authentication of the individual users’ privacy terms to data companies. A logical proof of concept is offered, illustrating the potential steps involved in the creation of the PEA.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,672

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

New Ways of Thinking about Privacy.B. Roessler - 2006 - In Anne Philips Bonnie Honig & John Dryzek (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Political Theory. Oxford University Press. pp. 694-713.
An Intrusion Theory of Privacy.George E. Panichas - 2014 - Res Publica 20 (2):145-161.
Privacy and the Right to Privacy.H. J. McCloskey - 1980 - Philosophy 55 (211):17 - 38.
The Epistemic Account of Privacy.Martijn Blaauw - 2013 - Episteme 10 (2):167-177.
Privacy and Self-Presentation.Juha Räikkä - 2017 - Res Publica 23 (2):213-226.
Harm, Consent and the Limits of Privacy.Matthew Weait - 2005 - Feminist Legal Studies 13 (1):97-122.
Securing privacy at work: The importance of contextualized consent. [REVIEW]Elin Palm - 2009 - Ethics and Information Technology 11 (4):233-241.
Privacy, Intimacy, and Isolation.Julie C. Inness - 1992 - New York, US: OUP Usa.
Is there a right to privacy?Steven Davis - 2009 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 90 (4):450-475.
Does privacy undermine community.Mark Tunick - 2001 - Journal of Value Inquiry 35 (4):517-534.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-04-09

Downloads
30 (#529,972)

6 months
4 (#775,606)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

The Ethics of Biosurveillance.S. K. Devitt, P. W. J. Baxter & G. Hamilton - 2019 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 32 (5):709-740.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The right to privacy.Judith Jarvis Thomson - 1975 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 4 (4):295-314.
Political and ethical perspectives on data obfuscation.Finn Brunton & Helen Nissenbaum - 2013 - In Mireille Hildebrandt & Katja de Vries (eds.), Privacy, due process and the computational turn. Abingdon, Oxon, [England] ; New York: Routledge. pp. 171.

Add more references