Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
19 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
Winfield |
Privacy may be defined as a 'person's seclusion of himself or property from the public' |
|
Westin |
Privacy is the claim of individuals, groups or institutions to determine themselves when, how and to what extent information about them is communicated to others. |
|
Fried |
Privacy is not simply an absence of information about us in the mind of others; rather it is the control we have over information about ourselves |
|
Bok |
Privacy is the condition of being protected from unwanted access by others. |
|
Gross |
Privacy is the condition of human life in which acquaintance with a person or with the affairs of his life which are personal to him is limited. |
|
Gavison |
Limited access consisting of three independent and irreducible elements: secrecy, anonymity and solitude |
|
Posner |
The right to conceal disreputable facts |
|
Blaistein |
Privacy protects personality, guarding against conduct that is demeaning to individuality, affront to personal dignity or an assault on human responsibility. |
|
Benn |
Respect for someone as a person implies respect or him as one engaged in a kind of self-creative enterprise, which could be disrupted or frustrated even by so limited an intrusion as watching. |
|
Warren and Brandeis (1890) |
Even in the 19th century, they recognised the press invading people's privacy and that this as causing 'mental distress and pain' |
|
Hughes |
An individual or group experience privacy when he, she or they successfully employ barriers to obtain or maintain a state of privacy...an invasion of privacy occurs when those barriers are reached. |
|
Gross (sceptic) |
The concept of privacy is infected with pernicious ambiguities |
|
Bevier (sceptic) |
Privacy is a chameleon-like word used to designate widely disparate interests |
|
Post (sceptic) |
Privacy is a value so complex, so entangled in competing and contradictory dimensions that I despair whether it can be usefully addressed at all. |
|
O'Callaghan |
Rejects scepticism: words such as dignity and liberty have sufficient force that we are in some measure cognisant of their content. But the words are sufficiently vague at the same time so that some degree of reasonable disagreement about what they represent can be accommodated. In this way, these words project universality but allow for reasonable pluralism. The attempt to locate the essential or core characteristics or privacy has led to failure. The top down theories fail on their own terms-they never achieve the goal of finding the common denominator The taxonomists often seek to provide a complete definition of privacy but no matter how carefully they collect and arrange the relevant cases...new problems and cases will continue to arise. |
|
Top down approach to conceptualising privacy |
Conceptualisations of privacy prescribe a particular notion of what 'counts; as a privacy interest by which different claims to privacy may be addressed-we ask ourselves does the claim fit the definition We therefore impose a definition of privacy which necessarily includes some claims but not others. |
|
Solove |
Any attempt to locate a common denominator for all...things that fall under the rubric of 'privacy' faces an onerous choice. A common denominator broad enough to encompass nearly everything involving privacy risks being over inclusive or too vague. a narrow common denominator risks being too restrictive. |
|
Bottom up approach to conceptualising privacy |
Rather than imposing definitions upon claims to privacy, Solove suggests the claims to privacy should themselves be the starting point from which our understanding on privacy derives. Solove's taxonomy of privacy problems involves 4 categories: 1) information collection 2) information processing 3) information dissemination 4) invasion |
|
Kaye v Robertson |
CA didn't see what happened in this case as an invasion of privacy-they said 'it is well known that in English law there is no right to privacy and accordingly there is no right of action for breach of a person's privacy.' They noted the failure of the common law to protect in an effective way the personal privacy of individuals (they didn't change this though despite the fact they were in a position to do) CA was unhappy to reject his claim entirely and instead stretch the doctrine of malicious falsehood |