Seven Types of Privacy

  • Rachel L. Finn
  • David Wright
  • Michael Friedewald
Chapter

Abstract

As technologies to develop, conceptualisations of privacy have developed alongside them, from a “right to be let alone” to attempts to capture the complexity of privacy issues within frameworks that highlight the legal, social-psychological, economic or political concerns that technologies present. However, this reactive highlighting of concerns or intrusions does not provide an adequate framework though which to understand the ways in which privacy should be proactively protected. Rights to privacy, such as those enshrined in the European Charter of Fundamental Rights, require a forward-looking privacy framework that positively outlines the parameters of privacy in order to prevent intrusions, infringements and problems. This paper makes a contribution to a forward-looking privacy framework by examining the privacy impacts of six new and emerging technologies. It analyses the privacy issues that each of these technologies present and argues that there are seven different types of privacy. We also use this case study information to suggest that an imprecise conceptualisation of privacy may be necessary to maintain a fluidity that enables new dimensions of privacy to be identified, understood and addressed in order to effectively respond to rapid technological evolution.

References

  1. American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU’s view on body scanners. http://www.aclu.org/technology%2Dand%2Dliberty/body%2Dscanners. Last modified 15 Mar 2002.
  2. Bennett, Colin J. 1992. Regulating privacy: Data protection and public policy in Europe and the United States. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bloomfield, Steve. 2006. How an oyster card can ruin your marriage. The Independent on Sunday, 19 Feb 2006. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/how-an-oyster-card-could-ruin-your-marriage-467077.html.
  4. Clarke, Roger. 2006. What’s ‘Privacy’?. Australian Law Reform Commission Workshop. http://www.rogerclarke.com/DV/Privacy.html. 28 July 2006.
  5. Clarke, Roger. Aug 1997. Introduction to dataveillance and information privacy, and definitions of terms. Canberra: Xamax Consultancy. http://www.rogerclarke.com/DV/Intro.html.
  6. Curren, L., P. Boddington, H. Gowans, N. Hawkins, N. Kanellopoulou, J. Kaye, and K. Melham. 2010. Identifiability, genomics and UK data protection law. European Journal of Health Law 17: 329–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Department for Transport. 2001. Impact assessment on the use of security scanners at UK airports. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/%2B%2F http://www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/open/2010%2D23%2F. 29 Mar 2001.
  8. Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC). Transportation agency’s plan to X-ray travelers should be stripped of funding. Last modified June 2005. http://epic.org/privacy/surveillance/spotlight/0605.
  9. European Commission. Consultation: The impact of the use of body scanners in the field of aviation security on human rights, privacy, personal dignity, health and data protection. Brussels, 19 Feb 2009. http://ec.europa.eu/transport/air/consultations/2009_02_19_body_scanners_en.htm.
  10. European Commission, Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (General Data Protection Regulation), COM(2012) 11 final, Brussels, 25 January 2012.Google Scholar
  11. European Economic and Social Committee. 2010. Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the Use of Security Scanners at EU airports. COM 311 final, Brussels, 16 Feb 2011.Google Scholar
  12. Farah, Martha J. 2005. Neuroethics: The practical and the philosophical. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 9: 34–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Finn, Rachel L., and David Wright. 2012. Unmanned aircraft systems: Surveillance, ethics and privacy in civil applications. Computer Law & Security Review 28(2): 184–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fowler, Rebecca. 2003. Coded revelations: DNA the second revolution. The Observer, 27 Apr 2003.Google Scholar
  15. Fuchs, Christian. 2011. Towards an alternative concept of privacy. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society 9: 220–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gellert Raphael, and Serge Gutwirth. 2011. Privacy, data protection and policy issues in RFID enabled e-passports. In Privacy, data protection and ethical issues in new and emerging technologies: Five case studies PRESCIENT Deliverable 2, ed. Rachel Finn and David Wright, 31–59. Report prepared by the PRESCIENT consortium for the European Commission’s Directorate-General Research, 25 Nov 2011.Google Scholar
  17. Goold, Benjamin J. 2009. Surveillance and the political value of privacy. Amsterdam Law Forum 1: 3–6.Google Scholar
  18. The Guardian, Oyster data use rises in crime clampdown. 13 Mar 2006. http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2006/mar/13/news.freedomofinformation.
  19. Gutwirth, Serge. 2002. Privacy and the information age. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  20. Hall, Alan. 2009. Woman serial killer was just a phantom: German police admit. The Telegraph, 26 Mar 2009. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/5056339/Woman-serial-killer-was-a-just-phantom-German-police-admit.html.
  21. Hallinan, Dara, Philip Schütz, and Michael Friedewald, “Neurodata-Based Devices and Data Protection”. Paper presented at the 5th Bi-annual Surveillance and Society Conference, Sheffield, 3–4 April 2012Google Scholar
  22. Harvard Magazine, Where decisionmaking is measured. 12 Dec 2008. http://harvardmagazine.com/breaking-news/where-decisionmaking-is-measured.
  23. Hays, Dustin, and DNA Policy Centre. 2007. DNA, Forensics, and the Law. Last modified 2008. http://www.dnapolicy.org/policy.issue.php%3Faction=detail%26;issuebrief_id=42.
  24. Heussner, Ki Mae. 2009. Air security: Could technology have stopped Christmas attack? ABC News, 29 Dec 2009. http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/AheadoftheCurve/air-security-technology-stopped-xmas-attack/story?id=9436877.
  25. Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), Privacy Impact Assessment Handbook, Wilmslow, Cheshire, UK, Version 2.0, June 2009Google Scholar
  26. Juels, A., D. Molnar, and D. Wagner. 2005. Security and privacy issues in E-passports. In Proceedings of IEEE/Create-net SecureComm 2005, 74–88. Los Angeles: IEEE Computer Society Press.Google Scholar
  27. Kaspar, Debbie V.S. 2005. The evolution (or devolution) of privacy. Sociological Forum 20: 69–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kepecs, Adam. 2011. Neuroscience: My brain made me do it. Nature 473: 280–281. Accessed 2 Mar 2012. http://www.nature.com/doifinder/10.1038/473280a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Klitou, Demetrius. 2008. Backscatter body scanners – A strip search by other means. Computer Law & Security Report 24: 316–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kukk, Piret, Bärbel Hüsing and Michael Friedewald. 2011. Privacy, data protection and policy issues in next generation DNA sequencing technologies. In Privacy, data protection and ethical issues in new and emerging technologies: Five case studies PRESCIENT Deliverable 2, ed. Rachel Finn and David Wright, 143–174. Report prepared by the PRESCIENT consortium for the European Commission’s Directorate-General Research, 25 Nov 2011.Google Scholar
  31. Langheinrich, Marc. 2009. A survey of RFID privacy approaches. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 13: 413–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lunshof, J.E., R. Chadwick, D.B. Vorhaus, and G.M. Church. 2008. From genetic privacy to open consent. Nature Reviews Genetics 9: 406–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lyon, David. 2003. Surveillance after September 11. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  34. MacKinnon, Catharine A. 1987. Feminism unmodified: Discourses on life and law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Marx, Gary T. 2006. Soft surveillance: The growth of mandatory volunteerism in collecting personal information – ‘Hey buddy can you spare a DNA?’. In Surveillance and security: Technological politics and power in everyday life, ed. Torin Monahan, 37–56. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Marx, Gary T. 2012. Privacy is not quite like the weather. In Privacy impact assessment, ed. David Wright and Paul De Hert. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  37. McBride, Paul. 2009. Beyond Orwell: The application of unmanned aircraft systems in domestic surveillance operations. Journal of Air Law and Commerce 74: 627–662.Google Scholar
  38. McFarland, Dennis J., and Jonathan R. Wolpaw. 2011. Brain-computer interfaces for communication and control. Communications of the ACM 54: 60–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Medical Device Security Center. 2011. Medical Device Security Center. http://secure-medicine.org/.
  40. Mordini, Emilio. 2011. Whole body imaging at airport checkpoints: The ethical and political context. In Towards responsible research and innovation in the information and communication technologies and security technologies fields, ed. René von Schomberg, 165–209. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.Google Scholar
  41. Nature Biotechnology. 2009. DNA confidential. Editorial 27: 777.Google Scholar
  42. Nelkin, Dorothy, and Lori Andrews. 1999. DNA identification and surveillance creep. Sociology of Health & Illness 21: 689–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nijholt, Anton. 2009. BCI for games: A ‘State of the Art’ survey. In Entertainment computing – ICEC 2008, ed. Scott M. Stevens and Shirley J. Saldamarco, 225–228. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nissenbaum, Helen. 2004. Privacy as contextual integrity. Washington Law Review 79(1): 101–139.Google Scholar
  45. Nissenbaum, Helen. 2010. Privacy in context: Technology, policy and the integrity of social life. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Octopus Holdings Limited. Customer Data Protection. Last updated 2009.Google Scholar
  47. Office of the Privacy Commissioner, Privacy Impact Assessment Guide, Sydney, NSW, August 2006, revised May 2010Google Scholar
  48. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2008. RFID guidance and reports. OECD Digital Economy Papers, 152. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  49. Privacy International. 2009. PI statement on proposed deployments of body scanners in airports. Last updated 31 Dec 2009. https://www.privacyinternational.org/article/pi-statement-proposed-deployments-body-scanners-airports.
  50. Regan, Priscilla M. 1995. Legislating privacy: Technology, social values, and public policy, Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
  51. Rucker, Philip. 2010. US airports say seeing is believing as passengers face body-scan drill. Sydney Morning Herald, 5 Jan 2010. http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/us-airports-say-seeing-is-believing-as-passengers-face-bodyscan-drill-20100104-lq6o.html.
  52. Sample, Ian. 2012. Mind-reading program translates brain activity into words. The Guardian, 31 Jan 2012. http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/jan/31/mind-reading-program-brain-words.
  53. Schütz, Philip, and Michael Friedewald. 2011. Technologies for human enhancement and their impact on privacy. In Privacy, data protection and ethical issues in new and emerging technologies: Five case studies PRESCIENT Deliverable 2, ed. Rachel Finn and David Wright, 175–198. Report prepared by the PRESCIENT consortium for the European Commission’s Directorate-General Research, 25 Nov 2011.Google Scholar
  54. Solove, Daniel J. 2008. Understanding privacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Solve, Daniel. 2007. ‘I’ve got nothing to hide’ and other misunderstandings of privacy. San Diego Law Review 44: 745–772.Google Scholar
  56. Srivastava, Lara. 2007. Radio frequency identification: Ubiquity for humanity. Info 9: 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Steeves, Valerie. 2009. Reclaiming the social value of privacy. In Lessons from the identity trail: Anonymity, privacy and identity in a networked society, ed. Ian Kerr, Valerie Steeves, and Carole Lucock. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Supreme Court of Canada, R. v. Dyment (188), 55 D.L.R. (4th) 503 at 513 (S.C.C.).Google Scholar
  59. van Keulen, Ira, and Mirjam Schuijff. 2011. Engineering of the brain: Neuromodulation and regulation. In Making perfect life: Bioengineering in the 21st century, ed. Rinie van Est and Dirk Stemerding, 68–116. European Technology Assessment Group, June 2011.Google Scholar
  60. van Lieshout, Marc, Luigi Grossi, Graziella Spinelli, Sandra Helmus, Linda Kool, Leo Pennings, Roel Stap, Thijs Veugen, Bram van der Waaij, and Claudio Borean. 2007. RFID technologies: Emerging issues, challenges and policy options. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.Google Scholar
  61. Venier, Silvia. 2010. Global mobility and security. Biometric Technology Today 5: 7–10.Google Scholar
  62. Venier, Silvia and Emilio Mordini. 2011. Second-generation biometrics. In Privacy, data protection and ethical issues in new and emerging technologies: Five case studies PRESCIENT Deliverable 2, ed. Rachel Finn and David Wright, 111–142. Report prepared by the PRESCIENT consortium for the European Commission’s Directorate-General Research, 25 Nov 2011.Google Scholar
  63. Warren, Samuel, and Louis D. Brandeis. 1890. The right to privacy. Harvard Law Review 4: 193–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Westin, Alan. 2003. Social and political dimensions of privacy. Journal of Social Issues 59(2): 431–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Whitman, James Q. 2004. The two western cultures of privacy: Dignity versus liberty. The Yale Law Journal 113: 1151–1221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Zetter, Kim. 2010. Airport scanners can store, transmit images. Wired News, 11 Jan 2010. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/01/airport-scanners/.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rachel L. Finn
    • 1
  • David Wright
    • 1
  • Michael Friedewald
    • 2
  1. 1.Crown HouseTrilateral Research & ConsultingLondonUK
  2. 2.Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research ISIKarlsruheGermany

Personalised recommendations