Contextual Integrity Up and Down the Data Food Chain

Theoretical Inquiries in Law 20 (1):221-256 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

According to the theory of contextual integrity (CI), privacy norms prescribe information flows with reference to five parameters — sender, recipient, subject, information type, and transmission principle. Because privacy is grasped contextually (e.g., health, education, civic life, etc.), the values of these parameters range over contextually meaningful ontologies — of information types (or topics) and actors (subjects, senders, and recipients), in contextually defined capacities. As an alternative to predominant approaches to privacy, which were ineffective against novel information practices enabled by IT, CI was able both to pinpoint sources of disruption and provide grounds for either accepting or rejecting them. Mounting challenges from a burgeoning array of networked, sensor-enabled devices (IoT) and data-ravenous machine learning systems, similar in form though magnified in scope, call for renewed attention to theory. This Article introduces the metaphor of a data (food) chain to capture the nature of these challenges. With motion up the chain, where data of higher order is inferred from lower-order data, the crucial question is whether privacy norms governing lower-order data are sufficient for the inferred higher-order data. While CI has a response to this question, a greater challenge comes from data primitives, such as digital impulses of mouse clicks, motion detectors, and bare GPS coordinates, because they appear to have no meaning. Absent a semantics, they escape CI’s privacy norms entirely.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,130

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Brain Data in Context: Are New Rights the Way to Mental and Brain Privacy?Daniel Susser & Laura Y. Cabrera - 2023 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 15 (2):122-133.
Data Science and Designing for Privacy.Michael Falgoust - 2016 - Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology 20 (1):51-68.
Are publicly available (personal) data “up for grabs”? Three privacy arguments.Elisa Orrù - 2024 - In Paul De Hert, Hideyuki Matsumi, Dara Hallinan, Diana Dimitrova & Eleni Kosta (eds.), Data Protection and Privacy, Volume 16: Ideas That Drive Our Digital World. London: Hart. pp. 105-123.
Why privacy is not enough privacy in the context of “ubiquitous computing” and “big data”.Tobias Matzner - 2014 - Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society 12 (2):93-106.
Protecting health privacy even when privacy is lost.T. J. Kasperbauer - 2020 - Journal of Medical Ethics 46 (11):768-772.
Inaccuracy as a privacy-enhancing tool.Gloria González Fuster - 2010 - Ethics and Information Technology 12 (1):87-95.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-03-30

Downloads
102 (#206,830)

6 months
21 (#139,367)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?