The Ethics Of Our Privacy Protection Laws

While interpreting Should We Ditch the Idea of Privacy? by Don Tapscott, I had found that this article was my favorite. When it comes to choosing is one should stay private or keep their information public, I feel like that is up to that individual one hundred percent. In Should We Ditch the Idea of Privacy? Tapscott went over how many people should be more open and post more information on the internet to allow others to get a sense of what is going on. He believed Facebook is a “leading social-media site that promotes information sharing” making everyone’s life an open book for everyone to read and learn from. Additionally, to help is one is struggling with any mental health issues. Tapscott believes that by sharing personal information can

The topic of this paper is privacy. It will talk about the ethical and legal reasons for maintain privacy. The audience for this paper is high school level teachers in a school with one-to-one devices for every student.

The First Earl of Chatham, William Pitt, in his Speech on the Excise Bill, claimed that “The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the force of the Crown. It may be frail; its roof may shake; the wind may blow through it; the storms may enter, the rain may enter,—but the King of England cannot enter; all his forces dare not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement!”

In his essay “Why Privacy Matters” from The Wilson Quarterly, Jeffrey Rosen offers a compelling account of the harmful effects of eradicating our privacy. Rosen ventures into several different fields affected by the ever-growing intrusion of our privacy, offering a rich compendium of illustrations from the real world. From Monica Lewinsky’s fate under her investigation, to a Charles Schwab employee, Rosen offers a prolific arsenal of incidents where the dignity of privacy is challenged. In his descriptive examples, Rosen demonstrates a broad expertise within the field by taking his time to describe a careful characterization of each case by both implying his own personal experience

Privacy uses the theory of natural rights, in relation to new information and communication technologies. It is an essential human right that retrains both government and private party action that threatens the privacy of individuals. Although there is no publicity or personal rights in Australia – no rights to privacy that protects a person’s image - there have been many rules introduced when taking or uploading photographs or film.

our privacy is more violated than mine. You don’t have random checks at the airport, you don’t get interrogated by TSA when you’re simply headed to another city, and you don’t have to constantly prove to others that your religion isn’t based on violence and that you do not in any way condone terrorist attacks. An entire religion cannot be blamed for the actions of some individuals. As an African-American Muslim in this society, I may be viewed as someone who doesn’t deserve the right to privacy. The right to be left alone and make decisions about marriage, political affiliation, and religion.

The thing that jumped out the most while reading the article was the invasion of privacy. However, the software installed on the cars to monitor their activity is similar to the software that is installed on company computers to monitor their activity as well. This is done as a means to safeguard the assets to ensure they are being used properly for business purposes. This software is used to improve efficiency of the use of the asset, and protect against risk of the item being used improperly or illegally. The monitoring software acts as an internal control for the equipment use.

Where is the line between personal privacy and the greater good? Some people would argue that it is never ok for an official to have access to their personal information. Officials should not be able to use information they obtained from private devices or social networking sites in order to protect the community

The right to privacy may come in conflict with the investigation of police in several aspects. Narco-analysis, polygraph test and brain mapping tests, in application, make unwarranted intrusion into the right to privacy of a person. The Supreme Court was acknowledging the individual right to privacy by declaring these tests inhuman and unconstitutional. The Supreme Court in Directorate of Revenue and Anr v. Mohammed Nisar Holia cited the US Supreme Court judgement which held ‘thermal imaging’, a sophisticated sense enhancing technology which when kept outside the residential house of a person can detect whether the inmate has kept narcotic substance within as infringement on the right to privacy of the said person. The court discouraged the

In “The Right of Privacy,” Richard Posner argues that, “the law should in general accord private business information greater protection than it accords personal information. Secrecy is an important method of appropriating social benefits to the entrepreneur who creates them while in private life it is more likely to conceal discreditable facts” (404). However, his argument is flawed, because it dehumanizes individuals, disregarding the value of their privacy in order to place the corporate world above their needs and rights.

The case of Jones v. Tsige, 2012 ONCA 32 was a way for the law to see that law does indeed need to change with society. It deals with tort law and the right of action for intrusion upon seclusion existing in Ontario. It is based on personal privacy and the court heard that the defendant (Tsige) viewed the plaintiff’s (Jones) personal banking records 174 times within a four-year window. The plaintiff and the defendant did not personally know each other but worked at different branches of the Bank of Montreal in Ontario. The plaintiff was in a common-law relationship with the defendant’s ex-husband. When the plaintiff pursued litigation, the judge dismissed it because there was no existence of a tort invasion of privacy in Ontario at that

This is an equitable cause of action that protects against the improper disclosure of private information. In Australia, the law is not settle yet to whether this action also covers for an intrusion upon private life without an actual disclosure of information. However, the recent High Court observations in the Lenah’s case may support a claim similar to yours.

The Circle represents the story of pushing boundaries of privacy, ethics and personal freedom. The main character of the movie is Mae Holland who gets an opportunity to work for the world’s largest technology and social media company named Circle by the help of her friend Annie. Mae pushes boundaries of privacy, ethics and personal freedom and agrees to be a part of an experiment where all her personal activities and whatever she does can be seen by public because according to the company’s founder no one should be scared to share their information if they are doing everything right. Also, going full transparent made Mae a celebrity where she had millions of friends who would see her daily activities and support her or discourage her. However,

On October 31, 2006, eighteen-year-old Nikki Catsouras slammed her father’s sports car into the side of a concrete tollbooth in Orange County, California, resulting in the decapitation of her head. The California Highway Patrol, following standard protocol, secured the scene and took photographs. A few weeks later, photos from the crash were circulating on the Internet. As summarized in a later court filing, two employees of the CHP admitted to e-mailing nine gruesome images of Castouras’ injuries to their friends and family members on Halloween—for pure shock value. The Catsouras family took legal action against the CHP in an attempt to remove the gruesome pictures off the Internet. This incident is one of many that has caused individuals

The common thread that goes through the entire judgement of privacy is the supremacy of the individual in the Constitution. The reference of the Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala has been given to the judgement of privacy so