technology have triggered an unprecedented challenge to the protection of privacy and personal data. 1 Since 9/11 public authorities have significantly expanded their surveillance powers with the aim to protect national security, and disrupt potential terrorist threats. 2 Either by directly taking on the

In: Tilburg Law Review

1 Introduction In this chapter, I offer an interpretation of some primary concepts of liberalism that are compatible with rights of the homeless. For this purpose, I discuss the issue of homelessness within the liberal context of the definition of domains of privacy. The extent of application of

In: The Ethics of Homelessness: Philosophical Perspectives

to privacy are now vulnerable to a degree unimaginable pre-9/11. 4 Recent revelations concerning data surveillance have focused attention on the issue of mass data collection in both the usa and the eu . In particular, the usa National Security Agency ( nsa ) has been able covertly to gather

In: Tilburg Law Review

model of pre-emptive surveillance with fundamental rights, and in particular the right to privacy. The aim of this article is to analyse the main elements of this emergent system of pre-emptive surveillance at a global scale and to assess the implication of such a system on privacy. Section 2 is devoted

In: Tilburg Law Review

technical measures — should take to allow for progress in data-intensive health research while effectively protecting fundamental rights and other morally relevant interests. This debate usually revolves around the right to respect for private life (hereafter: the right to privacy) as the key fundamental

In: European Journal of Health Law

’s privacy expectations. 4 As a result of these developments, police agencies and prosecution services are experiencing pressure from politicians and the public to increase the fight against cybercrime, while at the same time feeling insufficiently equipped for this task. 5 In an attempt to

In: European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice

This article looks into the politicisation of security. Politicisation, in contrast to securitisation, presupposes that security issues are controversially debated in a public arena without foregone conclusions as to how they are going to be handled. In order to locate and observe politicisation processes empirically, we suggest to look at privacy, a key notion and main tool for resistance vis-à-vis security logics. By examining two issue areas (video surveillance and cybersecurity), we highlight different tactics through which privacy is mobilised as a boundary object to politicise security. The invocation of privacy offers an alternative viewpoint on security, one where the human (digital) body and a human centred notion of security is at the centre. The value of its integrity and the need for its protection is a weighty counter to the abstract and often absolute claims of ‘more security’ through technological means.

In: European Review of International Studies
Privacy is a basic concept in discussions on the concept of human rights. This first book on the (traditional) Chinese approach to the subject shows that concepts of privacy have been part of discourse in China from the earliest recorded times to the present, with varying contents, mechanisms, functions and values at different times and among different groups of people.
Individual chapters examine inscriptions on early bronzes, medical case histories in the Ming and Qing dynasties, fictional representations of privacy experiences, discussions on public and private virtue by Liang Qichao, the role (or absence) of privacy issues in letters in early imperial China, and the function and values of privacy, secrecy and seclusion in the correspondence between Lu Xun and Xu Guangping.
As the first treatment of Chinese concepts of privacy in any language, the book is interdiscipinary by nature and pays particular attention to the terminology and methodology of privacy studies.

With more than 30% of the world’s population now connected to the Internet, online personal privacy has become a top concern among citizens of many nations and regions, and it has become clear that attitudes about and conceptions of online privacy represent a nexus of significant change in the construction of culture and society. These attitudes and conceptions may differ significantly across cultures and national borders, therefore examining different notions of privacy may better enable us to understand the changes underway. Using both qualitative and quantitative methodologies, I undertook an exploratory study into two research questions: 1) How do Internet users in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam understand and conceive of online personal privacy?, and 2) How concerned are they about online privacy? Rather than imposing Western definitions of privacy on local respondents, I attempted to infer a definition of Vietnamese privacy values and conceptions from scratch using methods designed to avoid priming respondents with non-local perceptions of the research topic. The results reveal a more complex conception of personal privacy than those predicted for Vietnam by Hofstede’s dimensions of national culture. In Vietnam, privacy appears to be chiefly understood as a means of safeguarding valuable personal data on the Internet from dangerous individuals who seek to obtain it for malign purposes, rather than a fundamental right, an inviolable aspect of self, or a claim by individuals to be left alone and free from surveillance. Vietnamese appear unconcerned about governmental or organisational scrutiny, and seem to have little regard for privacy policies or regulations. In this, the Vietnamese conception of online privacy appears to differ significantly from longstanding notions of privacy that have informed discourse, social practice, and regulatory efforts in the Western hemisphere for more than a century and which continue to influence current debates and policy decisions.

In: CyberCulture Now: Social and Communication Behaviours on the Web

data privacy of innocent individuals in national security is quite significant. There are various reasons why national security agencies are made aware of individuals. The reasons can be more or less valid; the threat posed by a person can be real or fictitious. However, the persons concerned are

In: Tilburg Law Review