Advertisement

Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science

, Volume 30, Issue 4, pp 455–464 | Cite as

The customer economics of internet privacy

  • Roland T. Rust
  • P. K. Kannan
  • Na Peng
Article

Abstract

The World Wide Web has significantly reduced the costs of obtaining information about individuals, resulting in a widespread perception by consumers that their privacy is being eroded. The conventional wisdom among the technological cognoscenti seems to be that privacy will continue to erode, until it essentially disappears. The authors use a simple economic model to explore this conventional wisdom, under the assumption that there is no government intervention and privacy is left to free-market forces. They find support for the assertion that, under those conditions, the amount of privacy will decline over time and that privacy will be increasingly expensive to maintain. The authors conclude that a market for privacy will emerge, enabling customers to purchase a certain degree of privacy, no matter how easy it becomes for companies to obtain information, but the overall amount of privacy and privacy-based customer utility will continue to erode.

Keywords

Personal Information Privacy Protection Privacy Market Customer Information Market Science Fall 
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.

References

  1. Bellotti, Victoria. 1997. “Design for Privacy in Multimedia Computing and Communications Environments.” InTechnology and Privacy: The New Landscape. Eds. Philip Agre and Marc Rotenberg. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bowman, Lisa. 2001. “Is Microsoft’s Privacy Plan an Improvement?”CNET news.com, March 22. Available: http://news.com.com/21001023-886552.htmGoogle Scholar
  3. Cavoukian, Ann and Don Tapscott. 1996.Who Knows: Safeguarding Your Privacy in a Networked World. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  4. Cespedes, Frank V. and H. Jeff Smith. 1993. “Database Marketing: New Rules for Policy and Practice.”Sloan Management Review 34 (4): 7–22.Google Scholar
  5. Clark, Don. 2000. “E-Commerce (A Special Report): The Lessons We’ve Learned—Privacy: You Have No Secrets—It’s the Dark Side of E-Commerce: You Leave a Trail of Personal Information Wherever You Go.”The Wall Street Journal, October 23, p. R32.Google Scholar
  6. enonymous.com.2000.Internet Privacy: A Summary of Privacy Ratings Research by enonymous.com. Retrieved from http:// www.privacyratings.org/research.htmGoogle Scholar
  7. Feldman, Amy. 2000. “Protecting Your Financial Privacy.”Money 29(6): 161–164.Google Scholar
  8. Foxman, Ellen R. and Paula Kilcoyne. 1993. “Information Technology, Marketing Practice, and Consumer Privacy: Ethical Issues.”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 12(1): 106–119.Google Scholar
  9. Hall, E. T. 1966.The Hidden Dimension. Garden City, NJ: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  10. Harper, Christopher. 1998.And That’s the Way It Will Be: News and Information in a Digital World. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Hoffman, Donna L., Thomas P. Novak, and Marcos A. Peralta. 1999. “Information Privacy in the Marketspace: Implications for the Commercial Uses of Anonymity on the Web.”The Information Society 15(2): 129–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hosman, Lawrence A. 1991. “The Relationships Among the Need for Privacy, Loneliness, Conversational Sensitivity, and Interpersonal Communication Motives.”Communication Reports 4(2): 73–80.Google Scholar
  13. Kannan, P. K., Ai-Mei Chang, and Andrew B. Whinston. 1998. “Marketing Information on the I-Way.”Communications of the ACM 41 (3): 35–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Larson, J. H. and N. J. Bell. 1988. “Need for Privacy and Its Effect Upon Interpersonal Attraction and Interaction.”Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 6: 1–10.Google Scholar
  15. Lester, Toby. 2001. “The Reinvention of Privacy.”The Atlantic Monthly, March, 27–39.Google Scholar
  16. Loeb, Vernon. 2000. “Web Security, Privacy Are Goals of CIA Effort.”The Washington Post, February 16, p. A21.Google Scholar
  17. Markoff, John. 1999. “The Privacy Debate: Little Brother and the Buying and Selling of Consumer Data.”Upside 11(4): 94–106.Google Scholar
  18. Mason, Richard O. 1986. “Four Ethical Issues of the Information Age.”MIS Quarterly 10(1): 5–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Menon, Satya and Barbara E. Kahn. 1995. “The Impact of Context on Variety Seeking in Product Choices.”Journal of Consumer Research 22 (December): 285–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Petersen, Andrea. 2001. “E-Commerce (A Special Report): Industry by Industry—Privacy—Private Matters: It Seems That Trust Equals Revenue, Even Online.”The Wall Street Journal, February 12, p. R24.Google Scholar
  21. Raju, P. S. 1980. “Optimum Stimulation Level: Its Relationship to Personality, Demographics, and Exploratory Behavior.”Journal of Consumer Research 7(3): 272–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Richards, Jef I. 1997. “Legal Potholes on the Information Superhighway.”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 16(2): 319–326.Google Scholar
  23. Rombel, Adam. 2001. “Privacy and Security in a Wired World.”Global Finance 15(1): 26–31.Google Scholar
  24. U.S. Senate. 2000. “Know the Rules, Use the Tools: Privacy in the Digital Age: A Resource for Internet Users.” U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Report.Google Scholar
  25. Westin, Alan. 1967.Privacy and Freedom. New York: Atheneum.Google Scholar
  26. Zerega, Blaise. 2001. “Ten Trends for What’s Ahead.”Red Herring, December 17. Available from www.redherring.com/insider/2001/1217/419.htmlGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of Marketing Science 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roland T. Rust
    • 1
  • P. K. Kannan
    • 1
  • Na Peng
    • 1
  1. 1.University of MarylandUSA

Personalised recommendations