Monday, February 29, 2016

The Right of Privacy (EWA #4)

The authors of "The Right to Privacy" would have been undoubtly terrified if they were to live today. I would believe their main concern would be how easy you could use a smartphone to take a picture or record people against their will or knowledge.
Brandeis and Warren believed that it was the right of the individual to retreat from the world, and sometimes, it is not very clear what Facebook or other social media companies do with the data of users once they decide to delete or suspend their profiles. It also implies that both authors would treat Apple and social media giants such as Facebook with suspicion "(...)but modern enterprise and invention have, through invasions upon his privacy, subjected him to mental pain(...)". Brandeis and Warren, however, will acknowledge that those individuals like Facebook would receive their data from willing users, even though, with several loopholes and fine prints all along. "The right to privacy ceases upon the publication of the facts by the individual, or with his consent"
They acknowledge also that data that it is intended for private use would definitely have the potential to destroy the reputation of individuals, and they would fiercely oppose the creation of a "Master Key", on which, in wrong hands, would create plenty of situations similar to the "iCloud - Jennifer Lawrence" fiasco. People would be on risk to lose their jobs as well, since private texts and messages could contain sensitive (and inflammatory) information, further destroying the reputation of the victim. This was a major concern of Brandeis and Lawrence, and it is repeated with plenty of examples on the article: letters and literacy work (such as personal diary entries or letters), artistic material, trademarked material, that Copyright laws were unable to protect entirely.

6 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with you that the data intended for private use could destroy the reputation of individuals, but since it is being used by the FBI, do you think that the FBI would be using this data to destroy people's reps by exposing them on the media? Do you think that the FBI has that kind of a right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The government has a structure of check and balances that, when that situation occur, officials can be removed or even prosecuted if they use government resources for personal or nefarious purposes. We do not live in an Orwellian society in comparison to China or Russia.

      Delete
  3. I agree on the fact that if the authors could witness how privacy is fragile nowadays, they would probably change their point of views a lot. We live in a digital word, where we expressively and often public our data, thinking that our privacy is preserved (perhaps limiting the view of your data only for your contacts) where in reality, once you put your data online, it will be accessible, no matter what, to everyone or anyone who has the capabilities to access it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It still would be illegal though. I believe is crucial to classify data that is meant to be private (like the one that is storaged on Google Drive) from the data that is published on social media (like Facebook).

      Delete
    2. A teacher was expelled from her job at High School when she posted pictures of her on Facebook with two mugs of beer on her hand. The district accused her of "promoting alcohol", Was her privacy violated by the District? I rather say it was

      Delete