wildercb/PrivacyTextBooks1.2 · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 0 118
21. Time, Inc. v. Hill, 385 U.S. 374,413 (1967) (Fortas, J., dissenting).
22. Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179, 213 (1973) (Douglas, J., concurring) (citations
omitted) (quoting Kent v. Dulles, 357 U.S. 116, 126 (1958)).
23. Gavison, “Privacy and the Limits of Law,” 438.
24. See, e.g., O’Brien, Privacy, Law, and Public Policy, 5; Gerety, “Redefining
Privacy,” 263.
25. Anita L. Allen, Uneasy Access: Privacy for Women in a Free Society 7 (1988).
26. Ferdinand Schoeman, “Privacy: Philosophical Dimensions of the Litera
ture,” in Philosophical Dimensions o f Privacy: An Anthology 1, 14 (Ferdinand David
Schoeman ed., 1984).
27. See Bloustein, “Privacy as an Aspect of Human Dignity,” 970.
28. E. L. Godkin, “Libel and Its Legal Remedy,” 12 Journal of Social Science 69,
80 (1880).
29. E. L. Godkin, “The Rights of the Citizen, IV—To His Own Reputation,”
Scribner's Magazine, July-Dee. 1890, at 65. For a discussion of this article’s influ
ence on Warren and Brandeis, see Richard C. Turkington & Anita L. Allen, Pri
vacy Law: Cases and Materials 40-41 (1999).
30. Sissela Bok, Secrets: On the Ethics of Concealment and Revelation 10-11 (1983).
31. Hyman Gross, “The Concept of Privacy,” 43 New York University Law Re
view 34, 35-36 (1967) (emphasis removed).
Notes to Pages 19-24
205
32. Ernest Van Den Haag, “On Privacy,” in Nomos XIII: Privacy 149, 149
(J. Roland Pennock & J. W. Chapman eds., 1971).
33. Allen, Uneasy Access, 10. For additional proponents of limited-access concep
tions, see Edward Shils, “Privacy: Its Constitution and Vicissitudes,” 31 Law and
Contemporary Problems 281, 281 (1966) (privacy “is constituted by the absence of in
teraction or communication or perception within contexts in which such interaction,
communication, or perception is practicable”); Adam Carlyle Breckenridge, The
Right to Privacy 1 (1970) (“Privacy, in my view, is the rightful claim of the individual
to determine the extent to which he wishes to share of himself with others”).
34. O’Brien, Privacy, Law, and Public Policy, 15, 16.
35. Gavison, “Privacy and the Limits of Law,” 423,426, 433.
36. Id. at 433.
37. Gavison openly recognizes that her theory excludes these things. See id.
at 436.
38. Id.
39. Richard A. Posner, TheEconomics o f Justice 272-73 (1981).
. 40. Richard A^ Posner, Economic Analysis of Law 46 (5 th ed. 1998).
41. Posner, Economics o f Justice, 234.
42. Id. at 271. Posner’s conception of privacy is infused with his own normative
assessment of privacy as a form of deception. According to Posner, the “economist
sees a parallel to the efforts of sellers to conceal defects in their products.” Posner,
Economic Analysis of Law, 46.
43. Sidney M. Jourard, “Some Psychological Aspects of Privacy,” 31 Law and
Contemporary Problems 307, 307 (1966).
44. Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965); Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113
(1973).
45. 429 U.S. 589, 599-600 (1977).
46. William J. Stuntz, “Privacy’s Problem and the Law of Criminal Procedure,”
93 Michigan Law Review 1016, 1022 (1995).
47. Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 351 (1967).
48. 486 U.S. 35,40(1988).
49. 488 U.S. 445, 450-51 (1989); see also California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207
(1986) (holding that the Fourth Amendment did not apply to surveillance of prop
erty from airplane flying at 1,000 feet); Dow Chem. Co. v. United States, 476 U.S.
227 (1986) (holding that the Fourth Amendment did not apply to aerial surveil
lance of property with high-tech camera that could enlarge objects so that objects
half an inch in diameter could be seen).
50. Edward J. Bloustein, Individual and Group Privacy 123-86 (1978).
51. See, e.g., Arnold Simmel, “Privacy Is Not an Isolated Freedom,” in Nomos
XIII: Privacy 71, 81 (J. Roland Pennock & J. W. Chapman eds., 1971).
52. See Shils, “Privacy,” 305.
53. Kenneth L. Karst, “ ‘The Files’: Legal Controls over the Accuracy and Ac
cessibility of Stored Personal Data,” 31 Law and Contemporary Problems 342, 344
(1966).
54. Amitai Etzioni, The Limits o f Privacy 196 (1999).
55. Judith Wagner DeCew, In Pursuit o f Privacy: Law, Ethics, and the Rise ofTech
nology 48 (1997).
56. Inness, Privacy, Intimacy, and Isolation, 6.
206
Notes to Pages 24-27
57. Stanley I. Benn, “Privacy, Freedom, and Respect for Persons,” in Nornos
XIII: Privacy 2 (J. Roland Pennock & J.W. Chapman eds., 1971).
58. Alan Westin, Privacy and Freedom 1 (1967).
59. See, e.g., Breckenridge, Right to Privacy, 1 (noting that privacy is “the in
dividual’s right to control dissemination of information about himself”); Execu
tive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology, Privacy and Be
havioral Research 2 (Washington, D.C., G.P.O. 1967) (“The right to privacy is the
right of the individual to decide for himself how much he will share with others
his thoughts, his feelings, and the facts of his personal life”); Randall P. Ben-
zanson, “The Right to Privacy Revisited: Privacy, News, and Social Change,
1890-1990,” 80 California Law Review 1133, 1135 (1992) (“I will advance a con
cept of privacy based on the individual’s control of information”); Oscar M.
Ruebhausen & Orville G. Brim, Jr., “Privacy and Behavioral Research,” 65 Co
lumbia Law Review 1184, 1189 (1965) (“The essence of privacy is no more, and
certainly no less, than the freedom of the individual to pick and choose for him
self the time and circumstances under which, and most importantly, the extent to
which, his attitudes, beliefs, behavior and opinions are to be shared with or with
held from others”); Ian Goldberg, Austin Hill, & Adam Shostack, “Trust, Ethics,
and Privacy,” 81 Boston University Law Review 407, 418 (2001) (“We build our
own definition of privacy on what we consider the most elegant definition, ‘in
formational self-determination,’ which refers to a person’s ability to control the
flow of his own personal information”). Anne Wells Branscomb focuses almost
exclusively on the importance of control over information for privacy. See Anne
Wells Branscomb, Who Owns Information? From Privacy to Public Access (1994).
60. Miller, Assault on Privacy, 25.
61. Fried, “Privacy,” 482-83.
62. President Clinton’s Information Infrastructure Task Force (HTF), Principles
for Providing and Using Personal Information 5 (1995).

21. Time, Inc. v. Hill, 385 U.S. 374,413 (1967) (Fortas, J., dissenting).

22. Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179, 213 (1973) (Douglas, J., concurring) (citations

omitted) (quoting Kent v. Dulles, 357 U.S. 116, 126 (1958)).

23. Gavison, “Privacy and the Limits of Law,” 438.

24. See, e.g., O’Brien, Privacy, Law, and Public Policy, 5; Gerety, “Redefining

Privacy,” 263.

25. Anita L. Allen, Uneasy Access: Privacy for Women in a Free Society 7 (1988).

26. Ferdinand Schoeman, “Privacy: Philosophical Dimensions of the Litera

ture,” in Philosophical Dimensions o f Privacy: An Anthology 1, 14 (Ferdinand David

Schoeman ed., 1984).

27. See Bloustein, “Privacy as an Aspect of Human Dignity,” 970.

28. E. L. Godkin, “Libel and Its Legal Remedy,” 12 Journal of Social Science 69,

80 (1880).

29. E. L. Godkin, “The Rights of the Citizen, IV—To His Own Reputation,”

Scribner's Magazine, July-Dee. 1890, at 65. For a discussion of this article’s influ

ence on Warren and Brandeis, see Richard C. Turkington & Anita L. Allen, Pri

vacy Law: Cases and Materials 40-41 (1999).

30. Sissela Bok, Secrets: On the Ethics of Concealment and Revelation 10-11 (1983).

31. Hyman Gross, “The Concept of Privacy,” 43 New York University Law Re

view 34, 35-36 (1967) (emphasis removed).

Notes to Pages 19-24

205

32. Ernest Van Den Haag, “On Privacy,” in Nomos XIII: Privacy 149, 149

(J. Roland Pennock & J. W. Chapman eds., 1971).

33. Allen, Uneasy Access, 10. For additional proponents of limited-access concep

tions, see Edward Shils, “Privacy: Its Constitution and Vicissitudes,” 31 Law and

Contemporary Problems 281, 281 (1966) (privacy “is constituted by the absence of in

teraction or communication or perception within contexts in which such interaction,

communication, or perception is practicable”); Adam Carlyle Breckenridge, The

Right to Privacy 1 (1970) (“Privacy, in my view, is the rightful claim of the individual

to determine the extent to which he wishes to share of himself with others”).

34. O’Brien, Privacy, Law, and Public Policy, 15, 16.

35. Gavison, “Privacy and the Limits of Law,” 423,426, 433.

36. Id. at 433.

37. Gavison openly recognizes that her theory excludes these things. See id.

at 436.

38. Id.

39. Richard A. Posner, TheEconomics o f Justice 272-73 (1981).

. 40. Richard A^ Posner, Economic Analysis of Law 46 (5 th ed. 1998).

41. Posner, Economics o f Justice, 234.

42. Id. at 271. Posner’s conception of privacy is infused with his own normative

assessment of privacy as a form of deception. According to Posner, the “economist

sees a parallel to the efforts of sellers to conceal defects in their products.” Posner,

Economic Analysis of Law, 46.

43. Sidney M. Jourard, “Some Psychological Aspects of Privacy,” 31 Law and

Contemporary Problems 307, 307 (1966).

44. Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965); Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113

(1973).

45. 429 U.S. 589, 599-600 (1977).

46. William J. Stuntz, “Privacy’s Problem and the Law of Criminal Procedure,”

93 Michigan Law Review 1016, 1022 (1995).

47. Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 351 (1967).

48. 486 U.S. 35,40(1988).

49. 488 U.S. 445, 450-51 (1989); see also California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207

(1986) (holding that the Fourth Amendment did not apply to surveillance of prop

erty from airplane flying at 1,000 feet); Dow Chem. Co. v. United States, 476 U.S.

227 (1986) (holding that the Fourth Amendment did not apply to aerial surveil

lance of property with high-tech camera that could enlarge objects so that objects

half an inch in diameter could be seen).

50. Edward J. Bloustein, Individual and Group Privacy 123-86 (1978).

51. See, e.g., Arnold Simmel, “Privacy Is Not an Isolated Freedom,” in Nomos

XIII: Privacy 71, 81 (J. Roland Pennock & J. W. Chapman eds., 1971).

52. See Shils, “Privacy,” 305.

53. Kenneth L. Karst, “ ‘The Files’: Legal Controls over the Accuracy and Ac

cessibility of Stored Personal Data,” 31 Law and Contemporary Problems 342, 344

(1966).

54. Amitai Etzioni, The Limits o f Privacy 196 (1999).

55. Judith Wagner DeCew, In Pursuit o f Privacy: Law, Ethics, and the Rise ofTech

nology 48 (1997).

56. Inness, Privacy, Intimacy, and Isolation, 6.

206

Notes to Pages 24-27

57. Stanley I. Benn, “Privacy, Freedom, and Respect for Persons,” in Nornos

XIII: Privacy 2 (J. Roland Pennock & J.W. Chapman eds., 1971).

58. Alan Westin, Privacy and Freedom 1 (1967).

59. See, e.g., Breckenridge, Right to Privacy, 1 (noting that privacy is “the in

dividual’s right to control dissemination of information about himself”); Execu

tive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology, Privacy and Be

havioral Research 2 (Washington, D.C., G.P.O. 1967) (“The right to privacy is the

right of the individual to decide for himself how much he will share with others

his thoughts, his feelings, and the facts of his personal life”); Randall P. Ben-

zanson, “The Right to Privacy Revisited: Privacy, News, and Social Change,

1890-1990,” 80 California Law Review 1133, 1135 (1992) (“I will advance a con

cept of privacy based on the individual’s control of information”); Oscar M.

Ruebhausen & Orville G. Brim, Jr., “Privacy and Behavioral Research,” 65 Co

lumbia Law Review 1184, 1189 (1965) (“The essence of privacy is no more, and

certainly no less, than the freedom of the individual to pick and choose for him

self the time and circumstances under which, and most importantly, the extent to

which, his attitudes, beliefs, behavior and opinions are to be shared with or with

held from others”); Ian Goldberg, Austin Hill, & Adam Shostack, “Trust, Ethics,

and Privacy,” 81 Boston University Law Review 407, 418 (2001) (“We build our

own definition of privacy on what we consider the most elegant definition, ‘in

formational self-determination,’ which refers to a person’s ability to control the

flow of his own personal information”). Anne Wells Branscomb focuses almost

exclusively on the importance of control over information for privacy. See Anne

Wells Branscomb, Who Owns Information? From Privacy to Public Access (1994).

60. Miller, Assault on Privacy, 25.

61. Fried, “Privacy,” 482-83.

62. President Clinton’s Information Infrastructure Task Force (HTF), Principles

for Providing and Using Personal Information 5 (1995).