Annotated Bibliography: Internet Privacy
Introduction
With the rapid development of the technology, Internet has become a significant part in our daily life. The Internet does make our lives convenient, but at the same time, it raises many issues, like Internet violence, Internet fraud and Internet privacy. This report focuses on the Internet privacy issue. While enjoying the benefit, Internet users are asked to offer lot of their person information. Luzak (2014) argues that users should be clearly and comprehensively informed of the use of their personal privacy. He points out that Internet users are lack of information that cookies are set to store their tracks when they surf the Internet. Luzak analyzes the limitation of the current European
…show more content…
First, he refers to some comparative legal researches and find that many internet users are unaware of the existence of cookies on their computer. Also they are not clearly informed of the cookie’s use. As a result, their privacy may be violated. Then, based on the consumer behaviour findings, Luzak interprets the meaning of informed consent and suggests the way forward. He suggests a privacy notice should attract the internet users’ attention, reveal the privacy rules and should be written in layman terms instead of legal jargon. Finally, he compares cookies’ disclosures in the UK and in the Netherlands, points out the limitation of the current European guidelines and gives his advice step by …show more content…
To like or not to like: Fraley V. Facebook’s impact on California’s right of publicity statute in the age of the internet.
Loyal of Los Angeles law review[internet]. 2014 [cited 2016 Feb 18].
Available from http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=65146dfb-7e63-4276-b91d-5c05ef6ab1fa@sessionmgr4003&vid=1&hid=4211
Francesca, in 2014, argues that people in growing numbers are worried about how their personal privacies are infringed by social networks. She cites a case in California . In that case, some Facebook users claimed that Facebook violated their statutory rights by misappropriating their names and likenesses for revenue without their consent. Then she interprets two laws(common-law for commercial misappropriation and one under California Civil Code section 3344)and takes a closer look at two of the major issues the Farely court focused on: (1)whether the plaintiffs’ information met the “newsworthiness” exception; (2) whether there is no fraud or mistake involved in the decision-making. In the end, she draws the conclusion that social networks should obtain the genuine consent from its users and gives some practical
Did you know that almost everything you do on the internet is being tracked and recorded in some way? In the Article, George Orwell… Meet Mark Zuckerberg, by Lori Andrews, Andrews talks about how behavioral advertising, which is the tracking of consumer’s online activities in order to bring custom-made advertisements, is a topic that is concealed to many people and can cause damage. Search engines like Google store the searches you have made and in 2006 there were search logs released which had personal information that people were judged by (Andrews 716-717). Data aggregation is the main way Facebook makes its money. Andrews believes that it’s an invasion of privacy and is not known well enough by the public. This article is aimed at young and new internet users that are ignorant of the possible dangers on the web. Lori Andrews is successful at informing novice users about the dangers of behavioral
Using the informal tone he enhances his argument by providing several thought-provoking statements that allow the reader to see the logic in the article, “Social media is designed for the information shared on it to be searched, and shared- and mined for profit… When considering what to share via social media, don 't think business vs. personal. Think public vs. private. And if something is truly private, do not share it on social media out of a misplaced faith in the expectation of privacy” (134). The reader should agree with Edmond that when posting or being a part of the social media bandwagon, you’re life and decisions will be up for display. Moreover, the business vs. personal and public vs. private point is accurate and logical, because evidently if you post something on any social media outlet you should expect that anyone and everyone can see it, regardless of your privacy settings. Edmond highlights that Facebook along with other social networking sites change their privacy settings whenever they please without
“The standards of what we want to keep private and what we make public are constantly evolving. Over the course of Western history, we’ve developed a desire for more privacy, quite possibly as a status symbol…”(Singer) Technological change leads to new abuses, creating new challenges to security, but society adapts to those challenges. To meet the innate need for privacy, we learn what to reveal and where, and how to keep secret what we don't want to disclose. “Whether Facebook and similar sites are reflecting a change in social norms about privacy or are actually driving that change, that half a billion people are now on Facebook suggests that people believe the benefits of connecting with others, sharing information, networking, self-promoting, flirting, and bragging outweigh breaches of privacy that accompany such behaviours,”(Singer) This is obvious by the continuous and unceasing use of social media platforms, but what needs to be considered is that this information is being provided willingly. “More difficult questions arise when the loss of privacy is not in any sense a choice.”(Singer) When the choice to be anonymous it taken away through social media, the person loses the ability to keep their personal information
There is considerable utilitarian value in extending privacy rights to the Internet. The fear that communication is being monitored by a third party inevitably leads to inefficiency, because individuals feel a need to find loopholes in the surveillance. For instance, if the public does not feel comfortable with communica...
In the Engineering and Technology Journal, two engineers, Gareth Mitchell and Guy Clapperton, gave their thoughts on both sides of the privacy issue. Is gathering information violating personal privacy? They made their arguments using currency as a metaphor for personal information and online services a product. Mitchell argues the case that giving out personal information is “too high a price to pay” (Mitchell, 2013, p. 26). He says that despite the option to opt out of cookies and certain information, many sites are more covert and make their opt out option less accessible than a pop up asking to opt out. The site makes it hard for the Internet user to say no to being tracked. Mitchell warns the reader to take more consideration into what information they are giving away and that “privacy is not to be taken for granted” (Mitchell, 2013, p. 26). Getting information from the Internet would mean tra...
Jeff Jarvis is a journalist, professor, and public speaker. In his book, “Public Parts”, Jarvis’s own opinions on “publicness” are stated plainly. He sees both social and personal benefits to living a totally public life on the internet. David Kirkpatrick is a technology journalist and author. He offers no opinion of his own on subject of total public disclosure. He has written two books on the social media giant Facebook. Kirkpatrick’s book “The Facebook Effect” was reviewed by David Pogue in The New York Times, Sunday Book Review. Pogue wrote, “You come away with a creepy new awareness of how a directory of college students is fast becoming a directory of all humanity — one that’s in the hands of a somewhat strange 26-year-old wearing a T-shirt and rubber Adidas sandals.” His book may leave readers more cautious than ever about what information they themselves are uploading to the
“Human beings are not meant to lose their anonymity and privacy,” Sarah Chalke. When using the web, web users’ information tend to be easily accessible to government officials or hackers. In Nicholas Carr’s “Tracking Is an Assault on Liberty,” Jim Harpers’ “Web Users Get As Much As They Give,” and Lori Andrews “Facebook is Using You” the topic of internet tracking stirred up many mixed views; however, some form of compromise can be reached on this issue, laws that enforces companies to inform the public on what personal information is being taken, creating advisements on social media about how web users can be more cautious to what kind of information they give out online, enabling your privacy settings and programs, eliminating weblining,
The personal connection Americans have with their phones, tablets, and computers; and the rising popularity of online shopping and social websites due to the massive influence the social media has on Americans, it is clear why this generation is called the Information Age, also known as Digital Age. With the Internet being a huge part of our lives, more and more personal data is being made available, because of our ever-increasing dependence and use of the Internet on our phones, tablets, and computers. Some corporations such as Google, Amazon, and Facebook; governments, and other third parties have been tracking our internet use and acquiring data in order to provide personalized services and advertisements for consumers. Many American such as Nicholas Carr who wrote the article “Tracking Is an Assault on Liberty, With Real Dangers,” Anil Dagar who wrote the article “Internet, Economy and Privacy,” and Grace Nasri who wrote the article “Why Consumers are Increasingly Willing to Trade Data for Personalization,” believe that the continuing loss of personal privacy may lead us as a society to devalue the concept of privacy and see privacy as outdated and unimportant. Privacy is dead and corporations, governments, and third parties murdered it for their personal gain not for the interest of the public as they claim. There are more disadvantages than advantages on letting corporations, governments, and third parties track and acquire data to personalized services and advertisements for us.
Over the past decade the world has gotten much smaller due to the electronic communication the Internet has fostered. While this promotes business and international relations, problems arise regarding the protection of individuals’ personal information. Many countries around the world have developed privacy policies and laws protect an individual's information in the realm of electronic communication. Universal enforcement gets complicated because the Internet is not restricted to one country; it’s worldwide. As a result, concerns arise regarding the compatibility of various countries' privacy policies. This paper will discuss the current legislation in place for various major countries1, the existing conflicts between these countries’ policies and the implications these conflicts hold for the protection of privacy on the Internet.
The Internet offers many benefits but it also creates many threats that undermines our personal privacy. Concerns about loss of privacy are not new. But the computer's ability to gather and sort vast amounts of data and the Internet's ability to distribute it globally magnify those concerns [1]. Privacy concerns on the Internet are centered on improper acquisition, improper use of personal information such as intrusions, manipulation, discrimination, identity theft, and stalking of personal information. Today the Internet stretches our geographic boundaries and force us to deal with global ethic based on moral principles held to be valid across the cultures. Due to the nature of the Internet, our personal information may be transmitted over the internet and that the transfer of personal information may be made to any country in the world, regardless of the extent of any data protection laws and regulations in any of those countries.
The government gives each American citizen a set of unalienable rights that protect them from the government’s power. These rights cannot be broken, yet the government violates the Fourth Amendment daily to find ways to spy on the American public under the guise of protecting against terrorism. In 2007 President Obama said the American administration “acts like violating civil liberties is the way to enhance our securities – it is not.” Americans need to understand that their privacy is worth the fight. The people need to tell their neighbors, their congressmen, and their senators that they will not allow their internet privacy to be violated by needless spying. American citizens deserve the rights given to them and need to fight for the right to keep them by changing privacy laws to include Internet privacy.
The finding of this report are based on four different factors for different factor for analysis of personal data protection and personal data privacy. The first is current regulations, which ……
Papacharissi, Zizi, and Jan Fernback. "Online Privacy And Consumer Protection: An Analysis Of Portal Privacy Statements." Journal Of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 49.3 (2005): 259-281. Communication & Mass Media Complete. Web. 24 Nov. 2013.
As can be seen, from the information presented, the need for laws and restrictions concerning internet data collection is greatly needed. Moreover, the government can search private citizens data without warrant or cause. Also, companies are not only collecting internet user data but also selling it. The companies and agencies who commit such crimes should be fined or either closed down. In closing, the privacy and security of individuals on the internet should be upheld by the United States government.
The growing popularity of information technologies has significantly altered our world, and in particular, the way people interact. Social networking websites are becoming one of the primary forms of communication used by people of all ages and backgrounds. No doubt, we have seen numerous benefits from the impact of social media communication: We can easily meet and stay in touch with people, promote ourselves, and readily find information. However, these changes prompt us to consider how our moral and political values can be threatened. One common fear among users is that their privacy will be violated on the web. In her book, Privacy in Context, Helen Nissenbaum suggests a framework for understanding privacy concerns online. She focuses particularly on monitoring and tracking, and how four “pivotal transformations” caused by technology can endanger the privacy of our personal information. One website that may pose such a threat is Facebook.