Privacy Law Commons^™

Trusting Big Data Research, Neil M. Richards, Woodrow Hartzog

Scholarship@WashULaw

Although it might puzzle or even infuriate data scientists, suspicion about big data is understandable. The concept doesn’t seem promising to most people. It seems scary. This is partly because big data research is shrouded in mystery. People are unsure about organizations’ motives and methods. What do companies think they know about us? Are they keeping their insights safe from hackers? Are they selling their insights to unscrupulous parties? Most importantly, do organizations use our personal information against us? Big data research will only overcome its suspicious reputation when people can trust it.

Some scholars and commentators have proposed review …

Big Data And The Future For Privacy, Neil M. Richards, Jonathan H. King

Scholarship@WashULaw

In our inevitable big data future, critics and skeptics argue that privacy will have no place. We disagree. When properly understood, privacy rules will be an essential and valuable part of our digital future, especially if we wish to retain the human values on which our political, social, and economic institutions have been built. In this paper, we make three simple points. First, we need to think differently about "privacy." Privacy is not merely about keeping secrets, but about the rules we use to regulate information, which is and always has been in intermediate states between totally secret and known …

The Atlantic Divide On Privacy And Speech, Neil M. Richards, Kirsty Hughes

Scholarship@WashULaw

When does a right to privacy become a right of censorship? Conversely when does freedom of speech become a carte blanche to violate the dignity and autonomy of others? Discussions of privacy throughout the world frequently boil down to these questions. Despite the parallel relationships between privacy and speech in the United Kingdom and America, and despite their shared legal heritage, the two legal systems have struck the balance in radically different ways. In the United States, decisions balancing privacy and the First Amendment have invariably favoured the free speech interest, at least where a press defendant published lawfully-obtained “newsworthy” …

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

Scholarship@WashULaw

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, …

People Analytics And The Regulation Of Information Under The Fair Credit Reporting Act, Pauline Kim, Erika Hanson

Scholarship@WashULaw

People analytics — the use of big data and computer algorithms to make personnel decisions — has been drawing increasing public and scholarly scrutiny. Concerns have been raised that the data collection intrudes on individual privacy, and that algorithms can produce unfair or discriminatory results. This symposium contribution considers whether the Fair Credit Reporting Act’s regulation of consumer information used for employment purposes can respond these concerns. The FCRA establishes certain procedural requirements, and these can sometimes help individual workers challenge inaccurate information about them. However, the statute does little to curb intrusive data collection practices or to address the …

Information Privacy Law Scholars' Brief In Spokeo, Inc. V. Robins, Neil M. Richards, Julie E. Cohen, Chris Jay Hoofnagle, William Mcgeveran, Paul Ohm, Joel R. Reidenberg, David Thaw, Lauren E. Willis

Scholarship@WashULaw

This brief, submitted to the Supreme Court of the United States by 15 information privacy law scholars in the case of Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins (No 13-1339), argues that in enacting the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), Congress crafted a bargain between aggressive, secretive data-aggregating businesses and the public: if those businesses limited disclosures and made reasonable efforts to adhere to practices ensuring “maximum possible accuracy,” they would enjoy a safe harbor from litigation under many other state and federal theories. The FCRA’s consumer transparency requirements and remedial provisions were designed to encourage steady improvement in consumer reporting practices and …

The Internet Grows Up?, Neil M. Richards

Scholarship@WashULaw

Danielle Citron’s Hate Crimes in Cyberspace is one of the most important publications to date in the emerging fields of privacy and cyberlaw. In her thoughtful and insightful book, Citron explains the uneven playing field and frequently shocking acts of abuse that women face online, and demonstrates practical steps that we can take to remedy the problem of online hate through law, education, and the development of better, more inclusive norms. Other contributors to this Symposium have examined these contributions in great detail, pointing out important nuances of Citron’s argument, urging her in at least one case to be even …

Digital Laws Evolve, Neil M. Richards

Scholarship@WashULaw

The essay from Wired Magazine (UK)'s special volume, "The Wired World in 2015," argues that although digital laws have lagged behind technological advances, they are starting to catch up, and this trend will continue in 2015. When it comes to privacy and technology, the law is catching up all over the world.

Why Data Privacy Law Is (Mostly) Constitutional, Neil M. Richards

Scholarship@WashULaw

Laws regulating the collection, use, and disclosure of personal data are (mostly) constitutional, and critics who suggest otherwise are wrong. Since the New Deal, American law has rested on the wise judgment that, by and large, commercial regulation should be made on the basis of economic and social policy rather than blunt constitutional rules. This has become one of the basic principles of American Constitutional law. Although some observers have suggested that the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Sorrell v. IMS Health (2011) changes this state of affairs, such readings are incorrect. Sorrell involved a challenge to a poorly-drafted Vermont …

Watching The Watchers, Neil M. Richards

Scholarship@WashULaw

In this essay from Wired Magazine (UK)'s special edition, The Wired World in 2014, Prof. Richards argues that sousveillance–watching the watchers–is an important development that will be on the rise in 2014.

Intellectual Freedom And Privacy, Neil M. Richards, Joanna Cornwell

Scholarship@WashULaw

This essay offers an account of the complex ways intellectual freedom and privacy are interrelated. We pay particular attention to both the constitutional dimensions of these important values, as well as the important roles that social and professional norms play in their protection in practice. Our examination of these issues is divided into three parts. Part I lays out the law and legal theory governing privacy as it relates to intellectual freedom. Part II examines a special context in which law and professional norms operate together to protect intellectual freedom through privacy–the library. Finally, Part III discusses how government actions …

Big Data Ethics, Neil M. Richards, Jonathan H. King

Scholarship@WashULaw

We are on the cusp of a “Big Data” Revolution, in which increasingly large datasets are mined for important predictions and often surprising insights. The predictions and decisions this revolution will enable will transform our society in ways comparable to the Industrial Revolution. We are now at a critical moment; big data uses today will be sticky and will settle both default norms and public notions of what is “no big deal” regarding big data predictions for years to come.

In this paper, we argue that big data, broadly defined, is producing increased powers of institutional awareness and power that …

Four Privacy Myths, Neil M. Richards

Scholarship@WashULaw

Any discussion about privacy today inevitably confronts a series of common arguments about the futility of privacy in our digital age. "Privacy is Dead," we hear, and "people (especially young ones) don’t care about privacy." What’s more, privacy just protects bad behavior because those of us with "nothing to hide have nothing to fear." And anyway, the argument goes, new privacy laws would be bad policy since "privacy is bad for business."

There are other common claims, but these four are perhaps the most common. They are also myths, and in this essay I show why. First, privacy can’t be …

Is The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court Really A Rubber Stamp? Ex Parte Proceedings And The Fisc Win Rate, Conor Clarke

Scholarship@WashULaw

One of the most common criticisms of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court is that the court has approved more than 99% of the government’s 33,000 ex parte surveillance requests, a fact cited as extraordinary evidence that the court is nothing more than a rubber stamp. This Essay disputes that popular criticism in two ways. First, I argue that there are good reasons to expect ex parte processes to produce lopsided results, since the government selects applications based in part on the level of oversight the court applies – just as, in most other legal contexts, ‘the decision to litigate’ depends …

Keep Your Update To Yourself, Neil M. Richards

Scholarship@WashULaw

An essay from Wired Magazine (UK)'s special edition, The Wired World in 2013. The essay makes the argument that frictionless sharing of reading habits should decline in 2013.

The Dangers Of Surveillance, Neil M. Richards

Scholarship@WashULaw

From the Fourth Amendment to George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, our culture is full of warnings about state scrutiny of our lives. These warnings are commonplace, but they are rarely very specific. Other than the vague threat of an Orwellian dystopia, as a society we don’t really know why surveillance is bad, and why we should be wary of it. To the extent the answer has something to do with “privacy,” we lack an understanding of what “privacy” means in this context, and why it matters. Developments in government and corporate practices have made this problem more urgent. Although we have …

Three Paradoxes Of Big Data, Neil M. Richards, Jonathan H. King

Scholarship@WashULaw

Big data is all the rage. Its proponents tout the use of sophisticated analytics to mine large data sets for insight as the solution to many of our society’s problems. These big data evangelists insist that data-driven decision making can now give us better predictions in areas ranging from college admissions to dating to hiring to medicine to national security and crime prevention. But much of the rhetoric of big data contains no meaningful analysis of its potential perils, only the promise. We don’t deny that big data holds substantial potential for the future, and that large dataset analysis has …

The Perils Of Social Reading, Neil M. Richards

Scholarship@WashULaw

Our law currently treats records of our reading habits under two contradictory rules: rules mandating confidentiality and rules permitting disclosure. Recently, the rise of the social Internet has created more of these records and more pressures on when and how they should be shared. Companies like Facebook, in collaboration with many newspapers, have ushered in the era of “social reading,” in which what we read may be “frictionlessly shared” with our friends and acquaintances. Disclosure and sharing are on the rise.

This Article sounds a cautionary note about social reading and frictionless sharing. Social reading might have some appeal, but …

Electronic Privacy And Employee Speech, Pauline Kim

Scholarship@WashULaw

The boundary between work and private life is blurring as a result of changes in the organization of work and advances in technology. Current privacy law is ill-equipped to address these changes and as a result, employees’ privacy in their electronic communications is only weakly protected from employer scrutiny. At the same time, the law increasingly protects certain socially valued forms of employee speech. In particular, collective speech, speech that enforces workplace regulations and speech that deters or reports employer wrong-doing are explicitly protected by law from employer reprisals. These two developments — weak protection of employee privacy and increased …

The Limits Of Tort Privacy, Neil M. Richards

Scholarship@WashULaw

The conception of tort privacy developed by Warren, Brandeis and Prosser sits at the heart of American understandings of privacy law. Rooted in protection of private information against unwanted collection, use, and disclosure, tort privacy protects against emotional injury, and was directed by design against disclosures of true, embarrassing facts by the media. In this essay, I argue that as conceived by Warren and Brandeis and interpreted by Prosser, tort privacy is a poor vehicle for grappling with problems of privacy and reputation in the digital age. Tort privacy, especially the disclosure tort, has from its inception been in conflict …

Prosser's Privacy Law: A Mixed Legacy, Neil M. Richards, Daniel J. Solove

Scholarship@WashULaw

This Article examines the complex ways in which William Prosser shaped the development of the American law of tort privacy. Although Prosser certainly gave tort privacy an order and legitimacy that it had previously lacked, he also stunted its development in ways that limited its ability to adapt to the problems of the Information Age. His skepticism about privacy, as well as his view that tort privacy lacked conceptual coherence, led him to categorize the law into a set of four narrow categories and strip it of any guiding concept to shape its future development. Prosser’s legacy for tort privacy …

Regulating The Use Of Genetic Information: Perspective From The U.S. Experience, Pauline Kim

Scholarship@WashULaw

This essay comments on an empirical study documenting the policies, practices, and attitudes of Australian employers regarding the use of genetic information from the U.S. perspective. The U.S. Congress recently enacted the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA), which, among other things, prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of genetic information and restricts employers’ access to their employees’ genetic information. Just as the Australian study found no evidence of systematic use of genetic testing or screening by employers, GINA was passed in the absence of any evidence of widespread employment discrimination on the basis of genetic characteristics. Although it …

The Puzzle Of Brandeis, Privacy, And Speech, Neil M. Richards

Scholarship@WashULaw

Most courts and scholarship assume that privacy and free speech are always in conflict, even though each of these traditions can be traced back to writings by Louis D. Brandeis – his 1890 Harvard Law Review article “The Right to Privacy” and his 1927 concurrence in Whitney v. California. How can modern notions of privacy and speech be so fundamentally opposed if Brandeis played a major role in crafting both? And how, if at all, did Brandeis recognize or address these tensions? These questions have been neglected by scholars of First Amendment law, privacy, and Brandeis. In this paper, I …

Privacy And The Limits Of History, Neil M. Richards

Scholarship@WashULaw

A short review essay of Lawrence Friedman's "Guarding Life's Dark Secrets: Legal and Social Controls over Reputation, Propriety, and Privacy" (Stanford Press 2007). The essay argues that Friedman tells a nuanced and compelling story of the rise and fall of the "Victorian Compromise," a series of interlocking legal doctrines protecting the reputations of elites around the turn of the twentieth century. "Dark Secrets" undeniably advances our understanding of both the genesis of privacy law and the relationships between law and culture in the Gilded Age. As a work of legal history, it is an instant classic–a must-read for anyone interested …

Rethinking Free Speech And Civil Liability, Neil M. Richards, Daniel J. Solove

Scholarship@WashULaw

One of the most important and unresolved quandaries of First Amendment jurisprudence involves when civil liability for speech will trigger First Amendment protections. When speech results in civil liability, two starkly opposing rules are potentially applicable. Since New York Times v. Sullivan, the First Amendment requires heightened protection against tort liability for speech, such as defamation and invasion of privacy. But in other contexts involving civil liability for speech, the First Amendment provides virtually no protection. According to Cohen v. Cowles, there is no First Amendment scrutiny for speech restricted by promissory estoppel and contract. The First Amendment rarely requires …

Intellectual Privacy, Neil M. Richards

Scholarship@WashULaw

This Article is about intellectual privacy–the protection of records of our intellectual activities–and how legal protection of these records is essential to the First Amendment values of free thought and expression. We often think of privacy rules being in tension with the First Amendment, but protection of intellectual privacy is different. Intellectual privacy is vital to a robust culture of free expression, as it safeguards the integrity of our intellectual activities by shielding them from the unwanted gaze or interference of others. If we want to have something interesting to say in public, we need to pay attention to the …

Privacy's Other Path: Recovering The Law Of Confidentiality, Neil M. Richards, Daniel J. Solove

Scholarship@WashULaw

The familiar legend of privacy law holds that Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis invented the right to privacy in 1890, and that William Prosser aided its development by recognizing four privacy torts in 1960. In this article, Professors Richards and Solove contend that Warren, Brandeis, and Prosser did not invent privacy law, but took it down a new path. Well before 1890, a considerable body of Anglo-American law protected confidentiality, which safeguards the information people share with others. Warren, Brandeis, and later Prosser turned away from the law of confidentiality to create a new conception of privacy based on the …

The Information Privacy Law Project, Neil M. Richards

Scholarship@WashULaw

One of the most interesting developments in privacy law literature over the past few decades has been the emergence of The Information Privacy Law Project, a group of scholars focused on the legal issues raised by the increasing collection, use, and disclosure of personal information made possible by evolving digital technologies. These scholars have sought to establish information privacy law as a field of study distinct from the constitutional right to decisional privacy. This Essay uses the recent publication of a major work by Daniel J. Solove, "The Digital Person: Privacy and Technology in the Digital Age", as a lens …

Collective And Individual Approaches To Protecting Employee Privacy: The Experience With Workplace Drug Testing, Pauline Kim

Scholarship@WashULaw

This contribution to a symposium on workplace privacy asks what difference it makes to think about workers' rights under a collective as opposed to an individual rights model in a particular context: that of protecting employee privacy. More specifically, it undertakes an examination of the range of disputes between employers and employees over workplace drug testing in the late 1980's and the 1990's, focusing on the differences between cases brought with union involvement and those brought by individual workers acting alone. In doing so, it asks how collective forms of disputing about drug testing differed from individual approaches, and whether …

Privacy Law In The New Millennium: A Tribute To Richard C. Turkington, Gregory P. Magarian

Scholarship@WashULaw

At least since Louis Brandeis and Samuel Warren's seminal 1890 article "The Right to Privacy,"' the idea of privacy has sparked some of the most significant and contentious debates in American law. Over the past three decades, Richard Turkington focused his formidable intellect on enriching those debates. Dick's untimely passing in 2004 deprived those of us who knew and worked with him of a treasured friend and a brilliant colleague. The broader legal profession lost a visionary. Probably more than any other scholar of his generation, Dick was responsible for expanding and deepening our understanding of the essential, sometimes elusive, …