Bitte verwenden Sie diesen Link, um diese Publikation zu zitieren, oder auf sie als Internetquelle zu verweisen: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/214030 
Autor:innen: 
Erscheinungsjahr: 
2016
Quellenangabe: 
[Journal:] Internet Policy Review [ISSN:] 2197-6775 [Volume:] 5 [Issue:] 4 [Publisher:] Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society [Place:] Berlin [Year:] 2016 [Pages:] 1-17
Verlag: 
Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society, Berlin
Zusammenfassung: 
Through qualitative analysis of the policies of two major global information intermediaries — Google and Microsoft — and related case studies, this paper demonstrates a) that intermediaries' participation in self-regulatory programmes and implementation of privacy principles does not necessarily translate into meaningful privacy safeguards for users in the face of growing private surveillance capacity; and b) that within the EU and US self-regulatory frameworks, information intermediaries have discretionary power to set their policies and practices prioritising strategic interests over privacy commitments. Discussions in this paper complement existing studies on the implementation of privacy principles stipulated in Fair Information Practices (FIPs) by enhancing understanding about the role of information intermediaries in defining privacy conditions of users within self-regulation.
Schlagwörter: 
Privacy
Intermediaries
Platforms
Self-regulation
Fair Information Practices
Terms of Service (TOS)
Persistent Identifier der Erstveröffentlichung: 
Creative-Commons-Lizenz: 
cc-by Logo
Dokumentart: 
Article

Datei(en):
Datei
Größe





Publikationen in EconStor sind urheberrechtlich geschützt.