Law Commons^™

A New Compact For Sexual Privacy, Danielle K. Citron

Faculty Scholarship

Intimate life is under constant surveillance. Firms track people’s periods, hot flashes, abortions, sexual assaults, sex toy use, sexual fantasies, and nude photos. Individuals hardly appreciate the extent of the monitoring, and even if they did, little can be done to curtail it. What is big business for firms is a big risk for individuals. The handling of intimate data undermines the values that sexual privacy secures—autonomy, dignity, intimacy, and equality. It can imperil people’s job, housing, insurance, and other crucial opportunities. More often, women and minorities shoulder a disproportionate amount of the burden.

Privacy law is failing us. Our …

Taking Trust Seriously In Privacy Law, Neil Richards, Woodrow Hartzog

Faculty Scholarship

Trust is beautiful. The willingness to accept vulnerability to the actions of others is the essential ingredient for friendship, commerce, transportation, and virtually every other activity that involves other people. It allows us to build things, and it allows us to grow. Trust is everywhere, but particularly at the core of the information relationships that have come to characterize our modern, digital lives. Relationships between people and their ISPs, social networks, and hired professionals are typically understood in terms of privacy. But the way we have talked about privacy has a pessimism problem – privacy is conceptualized in negative terms, …

Promoting Innovation While Preventing Discrimination: Policy Goals For The Scored Society, Danielle K. Citron, Frank Pasquale

Faculty Scholarship

There are several normative theories of jurisprudence supporting our critique of the scored society, which complement the social theory and political economy presented in our 2014 article on that topic in the Washington Law Review. This response to Professor Tal Zarsky clarifies our antidiscrimination argument while showing that is only one of many bases for the critique of scoring practices. The concerns raised by Big Data may exceed the capacity of extant legal doctrines. Addressing the potential injustice may require the hard work of legal reform.