Advertisement

The Privacy Merchants

  • Amitai Etzioni
Chapter
  • 256 Downloads
Part of the Palgrave Macmillan’s Studies in Cybercrime and Cybersecurity book series (PSCYBER)

Abstract

Most informed citizens probably know by now that corporations collect information about them, but they may well be unaware of the extent and scope of the invasions of privacy that are now widespread. Many may be aware of tracking tools referred to as “cookies,” which are installed on one’s computer by visited websites. They are used to identify the person and to remember his or her preferences. Some people protect themselves from such tracking by employing software that allows them to clear cookies from a computer. However, corporations have recently begun to install “supercookies” that are very difficult to detect, and if removed, secretly reinstall themselves.1 As one report concluded: “This means that privacy-sensitive consumers who ‘toss’ their HTTP cookies to prevent tracking or remain anonymous are still being uniquely identified online by advertising companies.”2

Keywords

Private Information Sensitive Information Privacy Protection Privacy Statement Deep Packet Inspection 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 6.
    Christopher Slobogin, “Government Data Mining and the Fourth Amendment,” University of Chicago Law Review 75 (2008): 317, 320.Google Scholar
  2. 29.
    Christopher Hoofnagle, “Big Brother’s Little Helpers: How ChoicePoint and Other Commercial Data Brokers Collect, Process, and Package Your Data for Law Enforcement,” North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation 29 (2004): 595, 611.Google Scholar
  3. 30.
    Daniel Solove, “The Digital Person: Technology and Privacy in the Information Age” (New York: New York University Press, 2004), 169.Google Scholar
  4. 34.
    Christopher Slobogin, “Government Data Mining and the Fourth Amendment,” University of Chicago Law Review 75 (2008): 320.Google Scholar
  5. 38.
    Julia Angwin, Dragnet Nation: A Quest for Privacy, Security, and Freedom in a World of Relentless Surveillance (New York: Times Books, 2014), 93.Google Scholar
  6. 54.
    For further discussion, see A. Michael Froomkin, Symposium, “The Death of Privacy?” Stanford Law Review 52 (2000); and Eugene Volokh, “Freedom of Speech and Information Privacy: The Troubling Implications of a Right to Stop People from Speaking About You,” Stanford Law Review 52 (2000): 1051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 55.
    Susanna Kim Ripken, “The Dangers and Drawbacks of the Disclosure Antidote: Toward a More Substantive Approach to Securities Regulation,” Baylor Law Review 58 (2006): 186, 195.Google Scholar
  8. 56.
    For further discussion on this subject, see Dan Ariely, Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions (New York: Harper Collins, 2008), 243.Google Scholar
  9. 61.
    Federal Trade Commission, FTC Staff Issues Privacy Report, Offers Framework for Consumers, Businesses, and Policymakers (December 1, 2010), http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2010/12/privacyreport.shtm.Google Scholar
  10. 63.
    Paul M. Schwartz, “Preemption and Privacy,” Yale Law Journal 118 (2009): 902, 921.Google Scholar
  11. 68.
    Paul M. Schwartz, “Preemption and Privacy,” Yale Law Journal 118 (2009): 902, 921.Google Scholar
  12. 71.
    Julia M. Fromholz, “The European Union Data Privacy Directive,” Berkeley Technology Law Journal 15 (2000): 461, 462.Google Scholar
  13. 72.
    Fred H. Cate, Privacy in the Information Age (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 1997), 36.Google Scholar
  14. 75.
    Julia M. Fromholz, “The European Union Data Privacy Directive,” Berkeley Technology Law Journal 15 (2000): 467–68.Google Scholar
  15. 79.
    Fred H. Cate, “The EU Data Protection Directive, Information Privacy, and the Public Interest,” Iowa Law Review 80 (1995): 431, 437.Google Scholar
  16. 83.
    For a discussion of this topic, see Ellen Mastenbroek, “EU Compliance: Still a ‘Black Hole’?” Journal of European Public Policy 12 (2005): 1103–20; see also,CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Maria Mendrinou, “Non-compliance and the European Commissions Role in Integration,” Journal of European Public Policy 3 (1996): 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 85.
    Amitai Etzioni, “DNA Tests and Databases in Criminal Justice Individual Rights and the Common Good,” in DNA and the Criminal Justice System: The Technology of Justice (MIT Press, 2004), 197–223.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Amitai Etzioni 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amitai Etzioni

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations