Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/214030 
Year of Publication: 
2016
Citation: 
[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
Publisher: 
Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society, Berlin
Abstract: 
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.
Subjects: 
Privacy
Intermediaries
Platforms
Self-regulation
Fair Information Practices
Terms of Service (TOS)
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Creative Commons License: 
cc-by Logo
Document Type: 
Article

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.