A Taxonomy of Privacy

You may also like...

2 Responses

  1. YaleOneL says:

    Came across an interesting Note that the Yale Law Journal published this month on the third party doctrine. The Note makes an interesting doctrinal proposal and introduces some new terms and concepts. It expands upon some of Solove’s ideas discussed in the Taxonomy piece and other articles:

    http://www.yalelawjournal.org/abstract.asp?id=534

  2. I wandered in here via a tip-off from Bruce Schneier’s CRYPTO-GRAM, and this turned out to be a quite interesting and nicely written paper. I’m a non-US computer scientist, so I don’t read a whole lot of law articles, but I couldn’t let go of this one.

    While this paper discusses privacy of individual people, we’ve been facing challenges in the rights of organizations to control information produced by and about themselves, also referred to as “privacy” of enterprises. For example in the context of inter-enterprise collaborations over the Internet, there’s a definite need for somehow representing reputation information and support real-world trust relationship forming through computational means. (Of course, whenever fluffy “people terminology” is being introduced to computer science, there’s a lot of wild pruning going on as to what aspects of a concept are modeled and what not.)

    This brings up issues such as whether it’s possible to share experience information about other organizations (particularly negative ones) to serve as a warning to other possible collaborators/victims, without being legally attacked for defamation. Also, it is unclear how actual distortion should be detected and protected against. The current-day reputation systems such as eBay’s seller ratings are not going to cut it – private, pseudonymous users doing “revenge negatives” to users rating them negatively is peanuts compared to when a large organization decides to bash back on a smaller one.

    In any case, thanks for the food for thought.