Loading…

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

Like this presentation? Why not share!

Thierer Internet Privacy Regulation

on

  • 6,864 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
6,864
Views on SlideShare
1,455
Embed Views
5,409

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0

12 Embeds 5,409

http://mercatus.org 5382
http://ppe.mercatus.org 11
http://feedly.com 3
http://feeds.feedburner.com 3
http://www.feedspot.com 2
http://paper.li 2
http://grad.mercatus.org 1
http://translate.googleusercontent.com 1
http://www.google.com 1
https://www.inoreader.com 1
http://newsblur.com 1
http://www.mercatus.org 1
More...

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Thierer Internet Privacy Regulation Thierer Internet Privacy Regulation Presentation Transcript

  • Privacy & The Internet: An Overview of Key Issues
    Adam Thierer
    Senior Research Fellow
    Mercatus Center at George Mason University
    May 19, 2011
  • Outline of Presentation
    What do we mean by “privacy?
    Different approaches to defining / protecting it
    Trade-offs associated with privacy regulation
    The challenge of information control
    Specific regulatory proposals
    An alternative vision / the “3-E Solution”
    2
  • What is Privacy?
    Privacy is a remarkably vague concept
    Means different things to different people
    Varies by cultures
    An ever-changing concept
    Reacts to evolving social norms & technological change
    If it is a “right,” we must determine how it plays alongside other, well-established rights (ex: freedom of speech & press freedoms)
    3
  • Privacy’s Fuzzy Concepts
    “Harm”
    How do we define and measure “harm”?
    Is “creepiness” a harm?
    Should “emotional harms” (feelings) be actionable?
    “Ownership”
    Who owns shared data?
    What is personally identifying information?
    “Informed Consent”
    Are strict contracts possible?
    “Sensitive Data”
    Health, financial, what else?
    4
  • Alan Westin’s 3 Visions / Paradigms
    “Privacy Fundamentalists”: Absolutists about privacy being a “right” & one that trumps most other values / considerations
    “Privacy Pragmatists”: Values privacy to some extent but also sees benefits of information sharing
    “Privacy Unconcerned”: Have little concern about who knows what about them
    5
  • How to Enforce / Protect Privacy?(U.S. vs. E.U. Visions)
    United States
    Privacy not viewed as a fundamental right
    Issue-specific / Sectoral approach
    Bottom-up case law / torts
    States have role; often more stringent than fed law
    More focus on “opt-out”
    “Big Brother” generally = govt
    = a reactive regime
    European Union
    Privacy viewed as a fundamental “dignity” right
    Broad-based approach
    Top-down “directives”
    More focus on “opt-in”
    “Big Brother” = private sector as much as govt
    = a preemptive regime
    6
  • The U.S. Sectoral / Issue-Specific Approach to Privacy Law
    Privacy Act (1974) = govt data collection
    FERPA (1974) = fed-funded education institutions
    Cable Comm. Policy Act (1984) = cable data
    Video Privacy Prot. Act (1988) = video rental records
    Driver’s Privacy Prot. Act (1994) = DMV records
    HIPPA (1996) = health records
    Gramm-Leach-Bliley (1999) = financial records
    COPPA (1998) = kids’ (under 13) online privacy
    CAN-SPAM Act (1993)
    Do Not Call registry (2003)
    7
  • The Battle over Online Privacy
    Policy battle has been raging since late 1990s
    FTC & Congress appeared poised to act around 2000, but...
    Industry self-regulation was given a chance
    9/11 preempted this debate to some extent
    Framework for past decade:
    Focus on Notice / Choice / Access / Security
    Rise of self-regulatory bodies & mechanisms
    Targeted FTC & state enforcement
    8
  • New Fault Lines in the Online Privacy Wars (and the legislative response)
    New activity driven by:
    Fears of “targeting” & “tracking” = “creepy” factor
    General unease with ubiquity of data access & availability
    Proposals:
    “Baseline legislation” / FIPPS (Kerry-McCain, Rush, Stearns)
    “Do Not Track” mechanism + regulation (Speier & Rockefeller bills)
    “Do Not Track Kids” / COPPA expansion (Markey-Barton)
    Internet “Eraser Button” (Markey-Barton)
    Geolocation restrictions (Markey-Barton)
    Data breach disclosure (Kerry-McCain)
    Data minimization requirements (Kerry-McCain, Rush)
    ECPA vs. Data retention laws
    9
  • Privacy Trade-Offs & Opportunity Costs
    Internet feels like the ultimate “free lunch;” most sites, services & content are free of charge.
    But, in reality, there is no free lunch.
    The implicit quid pro quo of online life: you gotta give a little to get a little (or a lot!). And most people like this deal.
    The Net is powered by advertising & data collection. Information is lifeblood of Digital Economy.
    Info may be collected to facilitate a better browsing experience or to help the site or service remain viable.
    In essence, information used in lieu of payment.
    Regulation could break this system & have other unintended consequences.
    10
  • The Problem of Information Control
    Even if we agree privacy is important and worth protecting, it will be very hard.
    “Information wants to be free” - Stewart Brand
    and that includes personal information
    “The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.” - John Gilmore
    and privacy regulation is, at root, a form of data flow censorship
    11
  • 10 Factors That Complicate Information Control Efforts
    12
  • Some Facts (or ‘Why Putting Genies Back in Bottles is So Hard’)
    Facebook: users submit @ 650,000 comments on the 100 million pieces of content served up every minute on its site.
    YouTube: over 35 hours of video uploaded every minute.
    Twitter: 300 million users produce 140 million Tweets / day, = a billion Tweets every 8 days. (@ 1,600 per second)
    Apple: more than three billion apps have been downloaded from its App Store by customers in over 77 countries.
    “Humankind shared 65 exabytes of information in 2007, the equivalent of every person in the world sending out the contents of six newspapers every day.” - Hilbert and Lopez
    13
  • “The Privacy Paradox”
    “People value their privacy, but then go out of their way to give it up.” – Larry Downes, Laws of Disruption
    “We give away information about ourselves—voluntarily leave visible footprints of our daily lives—because we judge, perhaps without thinking about it very much, that the benefits outweigh the costs. To be sure, the benefits are many.” – Abelson, Ledeen & Lewis, Blown to Bits
    14
  • What We Must Learn to Accept
    “Once information is out there, it is very hard to keep track of who has it and what he has done with it.” --David Friedman, Future Imperfect
    Privacy is not “dead” as some have claimed, but it is different than it was in past
    New realities of info dissemination, accessibility, searchability
    Rushed, heavy-handed solutions will be costly and perhaps not effective anyway
    15
  • Policy Responses(and their problems)
  • “Do Not Track” – The Theory
    Could be voluntary, but might be mandated.
    Would demand that websites honor a machine-readable header indicating that the user did not want to be “tracked.”
    In theory, this will allow privacy-sensitive web surfers to signal to websites they would like to opt-out of any targeted advertising, or not have any information about them collected when visiting sites.
    17
  • “Do Not Track” – Potential Downsides
    Costs: If law breaks the quid pro quo something must give…
    Paywalls and higher prices?
    less relevant or more intrusive advertising?
    Fewer services? Less media content?
    Int’l Competitiveness: Goldfarb & Tucker - “after the [EU’s] Privacy Directive was passed [in 2002], advertising effectiveness decreased on average by around 65 % in Europe.” Because regulation decreases ad effectiveness, “this may change the number and types of businesses sustained by the advertising-supporting Internet.”
    Practical? Does DNT scale? Apply internationally? To other devices?
    Regulatory creep: Will it serve as a template for other forms of Net regulation?
    18
  • COPPA Expansion – Background
    Special concerns about youth & online marketing
    COPPA (‘98) was first attempt to deal with it
    Requires “verifiable parental consent” for sites “directed at” children that collect info
    FTC defines rules (safe harbors) and enforces
    Never constitutionally challenged
    19
  • COPPA Expansion – Potential Problems
    What works for under 13 not likely to work for teens
    Would basically require mandatory age verification of all web surfers
    COPPA becomes COPA? = unconstitutional
    Serious free speech issues
    Irony = in name of protecting privacy, more info about users would need to be collected!
    20
  • Internet “Eraser Button” Concept
    Goal: Make it easier for people (esp. kids) to delete posted comments or content they later regret
    Practical Problem: Where is this button? Who controls it? What if info is shared content? Back-door to fraud / abuse?
    Principled Problem: Conflicts mightily with freedom of speech & press freedoms
    21
  • A Different Visionfor Privacy Protection
  • The Conflict of Visions:Anticipatory Regulation vs. Resiliency
    Long-standing conflict of visions about how to best manage risks:
    Anticipation
    Prevention is prime value
    Focus on the “Precautionary Principle”
    Resiliency
    Experimentation is prime value
    Focus on Learning / Coping
    23
  • Anticipatory vs. Resiliency-Based Solutions
    Anticipatory Reg Approach
    Mandatory “Do Not Track”
    Mandatory “Opt-In” for all data collection
    Bans on apps / functionality
    Restrictions on sharing / all defaults to private
    “Eraser Button” mandates / demands for data deletion
    Resiliency Approach
    Voluntary “Do Not Track”
    Offer opt-outs (encourages experimentation & innovation)
    No preemptive bans on tech
    No restrictions on sharing, but education about downsides
    Voluntary data “purges” & “data hygiene”
    24
  • Constructive Alternatives to Regulation
    Be careful @ how “harm” & “market failure” defined. (ex: Creepiness not a likely harm; data breech likely a harm)
    Focus on a “3-E Solution” to problems: Education, Empowerment, & (Targeted) Enforcement
    Encourage corporate and personal responsibility
    Think of privacy as an evolving set of norms, interactions & experiments
    Don’t Panic! We can learn to cope with technological change.
    25
  • 26
    The “3-E Solution”
  • #1: Educational Solutions
    Education at all levels
    Awareness campaigns from privacy advocates, govt, industry, educators, etc.
    Encouraging better online “netiquette” and “data hygiene”
    Push for better transparency across the board
    Better notice & labeling
    Need more watch-dogging of privacy promises made by companies
    27
  • #2: Empowerment Solutions
    = Helping users help themselves
    User “self-help” tools are multiplying
    AdBlockPlus, NoScript, other browser tools
    Industry self-regulation
    More cross-industry collaboration on privacy programs
    More education efforts (better notice)
    Best practices & better defaults
    More and better tools to respond to new developments and needs
    28
  • #3: Enforcement Solutions
    Holding companies to the promises they make
    stepped-up FTC Sec. 5 enforcement
    Demand better notice & transparency
    Mandatory disclosure of data breaches
    Targeted regulation of sensitive data, but with flexibility
    29
  • Conclusion / Key Takeaways
    “Privacy” is incredibly complicated & contentious
    Privacy can conflict with other values / rights
    All regulation entails costs & trade-offs
    There is no free lunch
    Information control is very, very hard
    “Silver-bullet” solutions rarely work
    The more education & transparency the better
    Resiliency is generally a smarter strategy compared to anticipatory, top-down regulation
    And, once more… don’t panic! We’ll get through and adjust.
    30
  • Further Readings
    Adam Thierer, Filing to Federal Trade Commission in ‘Do Not Track’ Proceeding, February 18, 2011.
    Adam Thierer, “Birth of the ‘Privacy Tax,’” Forbes, April 4, 2011.
    Adam Thierer, “Online Privacy Regulation: Likely More Complicated (And Costly) Than Imagined,” Mercatus on Policy, Mercatus Center at George Mason University, December 6, 2010 .
    Adam Thierer, “Erasing Our Past on the Internet,” Forbes, April 17, 2011.
    Adam Thierer, “Unappreciated Benefits of Advertising and Commercial Speech,” Mercatus on Point 86, Mercatus Center, January 2011.
    BerinSzoka and Adam Thierer, “COPPA 2.0: The New Battle over Privacy, Age Verification, Online Safety & Free Speech,” Progress on Point 16, no.11, The Progress & Freedom Foundation, May 21, 2009.
    31