1,721,005 research outputs found
Hidden in plain sight:Conceptual and Regulatory Challenges
No full textA recent off-spring of ‘privacy by design’ are artefacts and gadgets that aim to protect the privacy of the users. An example is the work of Adam Harvey, who ‘explores how fashion can be used as camouflage from face-detection technology’ (http://cvdazzle.com/). In this contribution, the author explores the differences using camouflage and masks as two distinctive tactics, which aim to restore aspects of anonymity provided by becoming part of the crowd. Current technological developments on biometrics-from-a-distance (e.g. face recognition system) aim to re-identify the single individual and therefore undermine an important aspect of urban anonymity, which has traditionally been perceived as a condition of the liberal urban life-style. While Adam Harvey’s works are inspired by World War I naval camouflage design, his works lean towards the use of the mask in revolutionary movements such as the Zapatistas or by members of Anonymous. Such Masks need be considered as ‘inter-faces’ in the literal meaning of the word, which, in contrast to the idea of camouflage, allow the users to be visible and present, while protecting the identity of the user
Conceptualising space and place:Lessons from geography for the debate on privacy in public
No full textThis contribution aims to open up the rich literature on the conceptualisation of space and place, primarily from the field of geography, for scholars in other disciplines, in particular legal and governance scholars engaged in the debate on (the right to) privacy in public spaces. Although there is no common understanding of what the concepts of space and place mean, they have been extensively conceptualised in human geography. Most legal scholars still tend to think of physical place and space – expressions often used interchangeably – as empty and neutral containers relating to territory: straightforwardly empirical, objective and mappable. Human geography shows that space and place are relational, socially co-produced, and dynamic. The construction of ‘places’, including places in public space, is intricately related to issues of access control, power relations, and identity-building. Particularly since the 1990s, the ongoing transformation of urban public space, including shifts in design, management, financing, and the proliferation of (digital) surveillance – termed the ‘privatisation’ and ‘securitisation’ of public space – has emerged as a key focus of geographical concern. While geography’s insights are invaluable for legal scholars researching the regulation of shifting and emerging urban spaces and places, particularly in relation to the theme of privacy in public, geographic research has often not yet reached the debate in other disciplines. This chapter remedies this gap by discussing, through a lawyer’s lens, key literature on (public) space and place, mapping out and highlighting different ways of thinking about public place and space in relation to major themes of context, power, and identity, and thereby opening up this rich area to scholars grappling with the regulation of public space
Exposure and Concealment in Digitalized Public Spaces
No full textThe Dutch CBP recently decided that monitoring people in and around commercial shops by tracking their mobile phone WiFi-signal without notice for analysis is against Dutch law. The ECJ judged in František Ryneš that monitoring the footpath in public space with a surveillance camera is in general a violation of EU law. Both authorities rejected collecting and processing personal data in ‘public space’ without consent or notification, as digitalization of public space has become a global trend nowadays, resulting in escalating privacy threat of multiple forms. Based on case analysis and conceptual construction, this chapter seeks to address the scope of reasonable ‘expectation of privacy’ in digitalized public spaces. It elaborates: (a) the genera of public spaces, including commercial venues, governmental utilities, even private properties, etc., and their related characteristics; (b) the functionalities of concealment and exposure of personal information in multiple public spaces, for instance, to achieve safety, identity establishment, autonomy, dignity, mutual trust, public participation, cooperation and economic efficiency; (c) the substantial impacts brought about by the increasing digitalization of public spaces, especially regarding the functionalities of personal information concealment; and therefore (d) the justified, reasonable ‘privacy expectation’ in public spaces, and feasible thresholds for safeguard
Policy, design and use of police-worn bodycameras in the Netherlands.
No full textPolice-worn bodycameras have been tested and deployed since 2009 in the Netherlands. They have been introduced after what were seen as positive results concerning bodycamera practices in the United Kingdom (UK). After a looming, almost silent introduction in the Netherlands, recent events have led these devices to gain momentum in certain countries, notably in the United States. In fact, as they are likely to become standard police equipment, bodycameras have sparked controversy and questions have been raised regarding their purpose and use. They are often introduced as a means to protect and safeguard police officers on duty insofar as they would be an objective witness to their actions, but worries are that the cameras will be used for other, notably surveilling, activities as well. This type of process – a (surveillance) technology is introduced for a certain purpose but in practice its purposes change and/or multiply. This chapter tries to show how this is taking place during different stages of the development - and testing of the camera. As a part of a larger research project about surveillance in urban nightscapes, this article investigates the bodycamera in the context of surveillance practices in Dutch nightlife districts. It aims to understand how the bodycamera came to being in this specific context and how it is being used. As such, it not only retraces the development steps of the bodycamera, especially how certain functionalities have been inscribed by both policymakers and designers, but it also attends to use practices, wherein design and political choices made in earlier stages create ambiguity
Big Data en surveillance, deel 1: Definities en discussies omtrent Big Data
No full textNaar aanleiding van een (vrij kort) college over surveillance en Big Data, werd me gevraagd iets dieper in te gaan op het thema, definities en verschillende vraagstukken die te maken hebben met big data. In dit eerste deel zal ik proberen e.e.a. uiteen te zetten betreft Big Data theorie en terminologie. Het punt dat ik zal proberen over te brengen is dat a) de term op zich moet worden bestudeerd en bekritiseerd en b) dat we in veel gevallen, zowel in de theorie als in de praktijk, helemaal niet te maken hebben met Big Data, maar met gekoppelde datasets. In het volgende deel zal ik ingaan op het gevaar voor onze privacy en surveillance en dat dit gevaar schuilt in het vaak ongecontroleerd combineren van datasets, en niet in de hoeveelheid data per se
Exposure and Concealment in Digitalized Public Spaces
No full textThe Dutch CBP recently decided that monitoring people in and around commercial shops by tracking their mobile phone WiFi-signal without notice for analysis is against Dutch law. The ECJ judged in František Ryneš that monitoring the footpath in public space with a surveillance camera is in general a violation of EU law. Both authorities rejected collecting and processing personal data in ‘public space’ without consent or notification, as digitalization of public space has become a global trend nowadays, resulting in escalating privacy threat of multiple forms. Based on case analysis and conceptual construction, this chapter seeks to address the scope of reasonable ‘expectation of privacy’ in digitalized public spaces. It elaborates: (a) the genera of public spaces, including commercial venues, governmental utilities, even private properties, etc., and their related characteristics; (b) the functionalities of concealment and exposure of personal information in multiple public spaces, for instance, to achieve safety, identity establishment, autonomy, dignity, mutual trust, public participation, cooperation and economic efficiency; (c) the substantial impacts brought about by the increasing digitalization of public spaces, especially regarding the functionalities of personal information concealment; and therefore (d) the justified, reasonable ‘privacy expectation’ in public spaces, and feasible thresholds for safeguard
- …
