This article discusses how interactive media threaten informational privacy, especially in a legal environment that fails to protect individuals' right to receive and use content without being scrutinized by private and government institutions.The article observes that as information about media consumption habits make up an increasingly large share of the stock of data that institutions can use in order to make inferences about individuals, it becomes increasingly more difficult for individuals to determine which types of behaviors would cause them to be assigned to a high-risk category. In the light of this observation, the article concludes by proposing that in order to address the uncertainty that individuals face in trying to figure out how institutions use personal information to categorize them into different risk groups, a privacy protection scheme that increases the accountability of these automated and manual interpretation processes is needed.
Uscs § 201 18 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (1996).
6.
Uscs § 609 Telecommunications Act (1996).
7.
Uscs § 1 Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act (2001).
8.
Abigail M. Roberson v. The Rochester Folding Box Company and Franklin Mills Company (1902) 68 A.D. 528.
9.
Aclu (2001) `USA Patriot Act Boosts Government Powers While Cutting Back on Traditional Checks and Balances ', American Civil Liberties Union2001 , URL (consulted Nov. 2002): http://www.aclu.org/congress/l110101a.html
10.
ACLU et al. v. Ashcroft (2003) No. 99—1324 (3rd Cir., 6 March 2003).
11.
ACLU et al. v. Johnson (1998) 4 F. Supp. 2d 1029; 1998 U.S. Dist. Lexis 9849.
12.
Ala (2004 [1953]) ` The Freedom to Read Statement', URL (consulted 8 November 2004 ): http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/statementspols/ftrstatement/freedomreadstatement.htm.
13.
Baruh, L. (2004) `Audience Surveillance and the Right to Read: Anonymous Reading in Interactive Media, Knowledge Technology andPolicy1(1): 59—73
14.
Baruh, L. and M. Popescu (2003) `Freedom of Speech and Segmenting the Citizens ', paper presented at 53rd Annual Meeting of International Communication Association, San Diego, CA, 24 May.
15.
Bell, T.W. (1998) `Fair Use vs. Fared Use: The Impact of Automated Rights Management on Copyright's Fair Use Doctrine', North Carolina Law Review76: 557—617.
16.
Benkler,Y. (2002) `Intellectual Property and the Organization of Information Production', International Review of Law and Economics22(1): 81—122.
17.
Bing, J. (1972) `Classification of Personal Information, with Respect to the Sensitivity Aspect', Data Banks and Society, pp. 178—92. Oslo: Universeitetsforlaget.
18.
Board of Education v. Pico (1982) 457 U.S. 853.
19.
Brzezinski, M. (2004) Fortress America. New York: Bantam Books.
20.
Burk, D.L. and J.E. Cohen (2001) `Fair Use Infrastructure for Rights Management Systems', Harvard Journal of Law & Technology15: 41—83.
21.
Charkow, B. (2003) `The Control over the De-Identification of Data', Cardozo Arts and EntertainmentLaw Journal21(1):195—228.
22.
Cohen, J.E. (1996) `A Right to Read Anonymously: A Closer Look at “ Copyright Management” in Cyberspace', Connecticut Law Review28: 981—1058.
23.
Cohen, J.E. (1998) `Lochner in Cyberspace: The New Economic Orthodoxy of “Rights Management”', Michigan Law Review97(2): 462—556.
24.
Cohen, J.E. (2000) `Copyright and the Perfect Curve', Vanderbilt Law Review53(6): 1799—822.
25.
Cohen, J.E. (2003) `Overcoming Property: (Does Copyright Trump Privacy?)', University of Illinois Journal of Law, Technology andPolicy1: 101—8.
26.
Cohen, L. (2003) A Consumer's Republic:The Politics of Mass Consumption in Postwar America. New York: Knopf .
27.
Columbia Insurance Company v. Seescandy.com, Sees Candys et al. (1999) 185 F.R.D. 573; U.S. Dist. Lexis 12652.
28.
Danna, A. and O.H. Gandy (2002) `All That Glitters is Not Gold: Digging Beneath the Surface of Data Mining', Journal of Business Ethics40(4): 373—86.
29.
Dendrite Int'l, Inc. v. Doe No. 3. (2001) 342 N.J. Super. 134.
30.
Denver Area Educational Telecommunications Consortium, Inc. et al., v. Federal Communications Commission (1996) 518 U.S. 727; 116 S. Ct. 2374; 135 L. Ed. 2d 888.
Epic (2002) `The USA Patriot Act', Electronic Privacy Information Center, Washington, DC, URL (consulted Nov. 2002): http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/usapatriot
33.
Froomkin, A.M. (2000) `The Death of Privacy', Stanford Law Review52(5): 1461—543.
34.
Gandy, O.H. (1996) `Legitimate Business Interest: No End in Sight? An Inquiry into the Status of Privacy in Cyberspace', University of Chicago Legal Forum11: 77—137.
35.
Gandy, O.H. (2000) `Exploring Identity and Identification in Cyberspace', Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics andPublic Policy14(2): 1085—111.
36.
Gandy, O.H. (2001) `Dividing Practices: Segmentation and Targeting in the Emerging Public Sphere', in W. Lance Bennett and Robert M. Entman (eds) Mediated Politics: Communication in the Future of Democracy, pp. 141—60. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37.
Gandy, O.H. (2002) `Data Mining and Surveillance in the Post-9.11 Environment', paper presented at IAMCR, Barcelona, 11 July.
38.
Griswold et al. v. Connecticut (1965) 381 U.S. 479.
39.
Hardy, T. (1996) `Property (and Copyright) in Cyberspace', The University of Chicago Legal Forum11: 217—60.
40.
Howard, P.N., J.N. Carr and T.J. Milstein (2005) `Digital Technology and the Market for Political Surveillance', Surveillance & Society3(1): 59—73.
41.
Information and Privacy Commissioner (2002 ) `Privacy and Digital Rights Management (DRM): An Oxymoron ?', URL (consulted Jul. 2003): http://www.ipc.on.ca/english/pubpres/papers/drm.htm
42.
Jackson, M. (2001) `Using Technology to Circumvent the Law: The DMCA's Push to Privatize Copyright', Hastings Communication and EntertainmentLaw Journal23: 607—46.
43.
John Doe v. 2TheMart.com Inc. (2001) 140 F. Supp. 2d 1088.
44.
Kang, J. (1998) `Information Privacy in Cyberspace Transactions ', Stanford Law Review50(4): 1193—294.
45.
Laudon, K. (1996) `Markets and Privacy', Communications of the ACM39(9): 92—104.
46.
Lessig, L. (1999) Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace. New York: Basic Books.
47.
Lessig, L. (2004) Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity. New York: The Penguin Press.
48.
Litman, J. (2001) Digital Copyright. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
49.
Litman, J. (2002) `War Stories', Cardozo Arts and EntertainmentLaw Journal20(2): 337—66.
50.
Lyon, D. (2001) Surveillance Society: Monitoring Everyday Life . Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
Marx, G.T. (1988) Undercover Police Surveillance in America. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
53.
Marx, G.T. (2004) `What's New about “New Surveillance”? Classifying for Change and Continuity', Knowledge Technology andPolicy17(1): 18—37.
54.
McAllister, M.P., and J. Turow (2002) `New Media and the Commercial Sphere: Two Intersecting Trends, Five Categories of Concern', Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media46(4): 505—15.
55.
McCahill, M. (1998) `Beyond Foucault: Towards a Contemporary Theory of Surveillance', in C. Norris, J. Moran and G. Armstrong (eds) Surveillance, Closed Circuit Television and Social Control, pp. 41—65. Brookfield, CT: Ashgate.
56.
McWhirter, D.A., and J.D. Bible (1992) Privacy as a Constitutional Right: Sex, Drugs and the Right to Life. New York: Quorum Books.
57.
Meiklejohn,A. (1948) Free Speech and Its Relation to Self-government . New York: Harper.
58.
Miller,A.R. (1971) The Assault on Privacy: Computers, Data Banks, and Dossiers. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
59.
Murphy, R.S. (1996) `Property Rights in Personal Information', Georgetown Law Journal, 84:2381-417.
60.
National Research Council (2002) The Digital Dilemma: Intellectual Property in the Information Age. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
61.
Nissenbaum, H. (1998) `Protecting Privacy in an Information Age: The Problem of Privacy in Public', Law and Philosophy17: 559—96.
62.
Norian, P. (2003) `The Struggle to Keep Personal Data Personal: Attempts to Reform Online Privacy and How Congress Should Respond', Catholic University Law Review52(3): 803—36.
63.
Olmstead et al., v. United States (1928) 277 U.S. 438.
64.
Olsen, S. (2001) `Reversal of Fortune — Tracking Web Trackers 2001', URL (consulted Oct. 2003): http://zdnet.com.com/2100—11—528627.html?legacy=zdnn
65.
O'Rourke, M.A. (1995) `Drawing the Boundary between Copyright and Contract: Copyright Preemption of Software License Terms', Duke Law Journal45(3): 479—558.
66.
Paramount Pictures Corporation et al. v. ReplayTV, Inc., and Sonicblue Inc. (2002) Case No: CV 01—9358 FMC (ex).
67.
Pennington, B. (2001) `New Technology Briefing: Cookies — Are They a Tool for Web Marketers or a Breach of Privacy?', Interactive Marketing2(3): 251—5.
68.
Phillips, D.J. (2001) `The Influence of Policy Regimes on the Development and Social Implications of Privacy Enhancing Technologies', paper presented at Telecommunications Policy Research Council, 29th Research Conference on Communication, Information and Internet Policy, Alexandria, 27—29 October.
69.
Phillips, D.J. (2002) `Negotiating the Digital Closet: Online Pseudonymity and the Politics of Sexual Identity', Information, Communication and Society5(3): 406—24.
70.
Piracy Deterrence and Education Act of 2004, H.R. 4077, 108th Cong. (2004).
71.
Posner, R. (1978) `An Economic Theory of Privacy', Regulation2: 17—30.
72.
Prosser, W.L. (1960) `Privacy: A Legal Analysis', California Law Review48(3): 383—423.
73.
Recording Industry Association of America, v.Verizon Internet Services (2003a) 240 F. Supp. 2d 24; 2003 U.S. Dist. Lexis 681.
74.
Recording Industry Association of America, v.Verizon Internet Services (2003b) 257 F. Supp. 2d 244; 2003 U.S. Dist. Lexis 6778.
75.
Recording Industry Association ofAmerica, v.Verizon Internet Services (2003c) 359 U.S. App. D.C. 85; 351 F.3d 1229.
76.
Regan, P.M. (2002) `Privacy as a Common Good in the Digital World ', Information Communication and Society5(3): 382—405.
77.
Reid Scofield v. Telecable of Overland Park, Inc. (1992) 973 F.2d 874. Reidenberg,J.R. (1998) `Lex Informatica: The Formulation of Information Policy Rules through Technology', Texas Law Review76: 553—93.
78.
Reiman,J.H. (1995) `Driving to the Panopticon: A Philosophical Exploration of the Risks to Privacy Posed by the Highway Technology of the Future', Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. Law Journal27: 27—44.
79.
Reno et al. v. ACLU et al. (1997) 521 U.S. 844.
80.
Rosen, J. (2000) The Unwanted Gaze:The Destruction of Privacy in America. New York: Random House .
81.
Rule, J. and H. Lawrence (1999) `Toward Property Rights in Personal Data', in C. J. Bennett and R. Grant (eds) Visions of Privacy: Policy Choices for the Digital Age, pp. 168-81. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
82.
Schiesel, S. (2003) `Your Own Affair, More (VCR) or Less (MP3)', URL (consulted Oct. 2003): http://www.umich.edu/~uc260/Library/digital%20privacy.pdf
83.
Schwartz, P.M. (1999) `Privacy and Democracy in Cyberspace', Vanderbilt Law Review52(6): 1609—702.
84.
Singleton, S. (1998) `Privacy as Censorship: A Skeptical View of Proposals to Regulate Privacy in the Private Sector', CatoPolicy Analysis295: 1—32.
85.
Solove, D.J. (2001) `Privacy and Power: Computer Databases and Metaphors for Information Privacy', Stanford Law Review53: 1393—462.
86.
Solove, D.J. (2004) The Digital Person: Technology and Privacy in the Information Age. New York: New York University Press.
87.
Stanley v. Georgia (1969) 394 U.S. 557.
88.
Sunstein, C.R. (2001) Republic.com. Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press. Tattered Cover Inc., v. The City of Thornton (2002) 44 P.3d 1044.
89.
Turner, J.C. (1991) Social Influence. Pacific Grove : Brooks/Cole Publishing Company . Turow, J. (1997) Breaking up America. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
90.
United States of America v. Cox Cable Communications (1998) U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6886. United States et al. v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc. (2000) 529 U.S. 803.
91.
US Congress (1984) House Report No. 934, 98th Cong., 2d Sess. 29.
92.
US General Accounting Office (2004) `Data Mining: Federal Efforts Cover a Wide Range of Uses' (GAO-04—548), Washington, DC.
93.
Wacks, R. (1989) Personal Information: Privacy and the Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
94.
Warren, S.D. and L.D. Brandeis (1890) `The Right to Privacy', Harvard Law Review4: 193—220.
95.
Zarsky,T.Z. (2002) `“Mine Your Own Business!”: Making the Case for the Implications of the Data Mining of Personal Information in the Forum of Public Opinion', Yale Journal of Law & Technology5: 1—55.
96.
Zarsky,T.Z. (2004) `Desperately Seeking Solutions: Using Implementation-based Solutions for the Troubles of Information Privacy in the Age of Data Mining and the Internet Society', Maine Law Review56: 13—59.
