Privacy in Mobile and Pervasive Computing. Florian Schaub

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ recognizes an individual right to privacy, the constitution only describes the rights of citizens in relationship to their government, not to other citizens or companies⁹ [Cate, 1997]. So far, no comprehensive legal privacy framework exists in the United States that equally applies to both governmental and private data processors. Instead, federal privacy law and regulation follows a sectoral approach, addressing specific privacy issues that arise in certain public transactions or industry sectors [Solove and Schwartz, 2015].

      Privacy with respect to the government is regulated by the Privacy Act of 1974, which only applies to data processing at the federal level [Gormley, 1992]. The Privacy Act roughly follows the Fair Information Principles set forth in the HEW report (mentioned earlier in this section), requiring government agencies to be transparent about their data collections and to support access rights. It also restricts what information different government agencies can share about an individual and allows citizens to sue the government for violating these provisions. Additional laws regulate data protection in other interactions with the government, such as the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act (DPPA) of 1994, which restricts states in disclosing or selling personal information from motor vehicle records, or the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) of 1986, which extended wiretapping protections to electronic communication.

      Privacy regulation in the private sector is largely based on self-regulation, i.e., industry associations voluntarily enact self-regulations for their sector to respect the privacy of their customers. In addition, federal or state privacy laws are passed for specific industry sectors in which privacy problems emerge. For instance, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) of 1974 regulates student privacy in schools and universities; and the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) of 1998 restricts information collection and use by websites and online services for children under age 13.

      The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996 gives the Department of Health and Human Services rule making authority regarding the privacy of medical records. The HIPAA Privacy Rule requires privacy notices to patients, patient authorization for data processing and sharing, limits data processing to what is necessary for healthcare, gives patients data access rights, and prescribes physical and technical safeguards for health records. Commonly, federal privacy laws are amended over time to account for evolving privacy issues. For instance the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) of 2008 limits the use of genetic information in health insurance and employment decisions.

      Privacy in the financial industry is regulated by multiple laws. The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) of 1970 governs how credit reporting agencies can use consumer information. It has been most recently amended by the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act of 2018, which, as a reaction to the 2017 Equifax Data Breach, gave consumers the right to free credit freezes to limit access to their credit reports and thus reduce the risk of identity theft. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) of 1999 requires that financial institutions store financial information in a secure manner, provide customers with a privacy notice annually and gives consumers the right to opt-out or limit sharing of personal information with third parties.

      The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) of 1991 provides remedies from repeat telephone calls by telemarketers and created the national Do Not Call registry.¹⁰ The Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography And Marketing (CAN-SPAM) Act of 2003 created penalties for the transmission of unsolicited email and requires that email newsletters and marketing emails must contain an unsubscribe link. The Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) of 1988 protects the privacy of video rental records.

      Those federal privacy laws are further complemented by state laws. For instance, many states have passed RFID-specific legislation that prohibits unauthorized reading of RFID-enabled cards and other devices (e.g., the state of Washington’s Business Regulation Chapter 19.300 [Washington State Legislature, 2009]). The state of Delaware enacted four privacy laws in 2015, namely the Online and Personal Privacy Protection Act (DOPPA), the Student Data Privacy Protection Act (SDPPA), the Victim Online Privacy Act (VOPA), and the Employee/Applicant Protection for Social Media Act (ESMA).

      One of the more well-known state privacy laws is California’s Online Privacy Protection Act (CalOPPA) of 2004, which poses transparency requirements, including the posting of a privacy policy, for any website or online service that collects and maintains personally identifiable information from a consumer residing in California. Because California is the most populous U.S. state with a large consumer market and due to the difficulty of reliably determining an online user’s place of residence, CalOPPA, despite being a state law, affected almost all US websites as well as international websites. In 2018, California became the first US state to enact a comprehensive (i.e., non-sectoral) privacy law. The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, which will go into effect in 2020, requires improved privacy notices, a conspicuous opt-out button regarding the selling of consumer information, and grants consumers rights to data access, deletion and portability.

      Due to the fractured nature of privacy legislation, privacy enforcement authority is also divided among different entities, including the Department of Health and Human services (for HIPAA), the Department of Education (for FERPA), State Attorneys General (for respective state laws), and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The FTC, as the U.S. consumer protection agency, has a prominent privacy enforcement role [Solove and Hartzog, 2014], including the investigation of deceptive and unfair trade practices with respect to privacy, as well as statutory enforcement (e.g., for COPPA). The FTC further has enforcement power with respect to Privacy Shield, the U.S.–European agreement for cross-border transfer. Due to its consumer protection charge, the FTC can also bring privacy-related enforcement actions against companies in industries without a sectoral privacy law [Solove and Hartzog, 2014], such as mobile apps, online advertising, or smart TVs. In addition to monetary penalties, FTC consent decrees typically require companies to submit to independent audits for 20 years and to establish a comprehensive internal security or privacy program. The FTC’s enforcement creates pressure for industries to adhere to their self-regulatory privacy promises and practices.

      In addition to federal and state laws, civil privacy lawsuits (i.e., between persons or corporations) are possible. Prosser [1960] documented four distinct privacy torts common in US law,¹¹ i.e., ways for an individual who felt their privacy has been violated to sue the violator for damages:

      • intrusion upon seclusion or solitude, or into private affairs;

      • public disclosure of embarrassing private facts;

      • adverse publicity which places a person in a false light in the public eye; and

      • appropriation of name of likeness.

      In summary, privacy is protected in the U.S. by a mix of sector-specific federal and state laws, with self-regulatory approaches and enforcement by the FTC in otherwise unregulated sectors. An advantage of this sectoral approach is that resulting privacy laws are often specific to the privacy issues, needs, and requirements in a given sector, a downside is that laws are often surpassed by the advancement of technology, thus requiring periodical amendments.

       Privacy Law and Regulation in the European Union

      On the other side of the Atlantic, a more civil-libertarian perspective on personal data protection prevails. Individual European states began harmonizing their national privacy laws as early as the mid-1970s. In 1973 and 1974, the European Council¹² passed resolutions (73)22 and (74)29, containing guidelines for national legislation concerning private and public databases, respectively [Council of Europe, 1973, 1974]. In 1985, the “Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data” (108/81) went into effect, providing a normative framework for national privacy protection laws of its member states [Council of Europe, 1981]. Convention 108/81 is open to any country to sign (i.e., not only CoE members), СКАЧАТЬ