Privacy principles, risks and harms

References

• 6, P. 1998. The Future of Privacy, Volume 1: Private Life and Public Policy. London: Demos, pp. 39–42.
   Google Scholar
• Article 29 Data Protection Working Party. (2009). Letter to the European Commission, Brussels, 11 February. Accessed June 22, 2013. http://ec.europa.eu/justice/policies/privacy/docs/wpdocs/others/2009_05_11_letter_chairman_art29wp_daniel_calleja_dgtren_en.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation. 2005. APEC Privacy Framework, APEC Secretariat, Singapore. Accessed June 22, 2013. http://publications.apec.org/publication-detail.php?pub_id=390
   Google Scholar
• APCC (Australian Privacy Charter Council). 1994. Australian Privacy Charter, December. [Online] Accessed June 22, 2013. http://www.privacy.org.au/About/PrivacyCharter.html
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, C. J. 2011. “In Defence of Privacy: The Concept and the Regime.” Surveillance and Society 8 (4): 485–496.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, C. J., and C. D. Raab. 2006. The Governance of Privacy: Policy Instruments in Global Perspective. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, C. J., and R. Grant. 1999. “Introduction.” In Visions of Privacy: Policy Choices for the Digital Age, edited by C. J. Bennett and R. Grant. Toronto: University of Toronto Press: 3–16.
   Google Scholar
• Calo, M. R. 2011. “The Boundaries of Privacy Harm.” Indiana Law Journal 86 (3): 1130–1162.
   Google Scholar
• Canadian Standards Association. 1996. Model Code for the Protection of Personal Information, CAN/CSA-Q830–95, March. [Online] Accessed June 22, 2013. http://www.csa.ca/cm/ca/en/privacy-code/publications/view-privacy-code
   Google Scholar
• Cate, F. H. 2006. “The Failure of Fair Information Principles.” In Consumer Protection in the Age of the Information Economy, edited by J. K. Winn. Ashgate: 341–378.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, R. 1997. “Introduction to Dataveillance and Information Privacy, and Definitions of Terms.” Xamax Consultancy, Aug. [Online] Accessed June 22, 2013. http://www.rogerclarke.com/DV/Intro.html
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, R. 2000. “Beyond the OECD Guidelines: Privacy Protection for the 21st Century.” Xamax Consultancy, 4 Jan. Accessed June 22, 2013. http://www.rogerclarke.com/DV/PP21C.html
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, R. 2006. “What's “Privacy”?.” Version of 7 August. Accessed June 22, 2013. http://www.rogerclarke.com/DV/Privacy.html
   Google Scholar
• CoE (Council of Europe). 1950. Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)), Strasbourg. Accessed June 22, 2013. http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf
   Google Scholar
• CoE (Council of Europe). 1981. Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data, Strasbourg, 28 January. Accessed June 22, 2013. http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/108.htm
   Google Scholar
• DLA Piper, Data Protection Laws of the World, March 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Electronic Privacy Information Center and Privacy International. 2007. Privacy and Human Rights 2006: An International Survey of Privacy Laws and Developments. Washington DC and London: Electronic Privacy Information Center and Privacy International.
   Google Scholar
• European Parliament and the Council. 1995. Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, Official Journal L 281, 23 November, pp. 0031–0050 (22 June 2013).
   Google Scholar
• European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 2000/C 364/01. Official Journal of the European Communities, C 364/1–22, 18.12. 2000. Accessed April 26, 2014. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Finn, R., D. Wright, and M. Friedewald. 2013. “Seven Types of Privacy.” In European Data Protection: Coming of Age?, edited by S. Gutwirth, R. Leenes, P. De Hert et al. Dordrecht: Springer: 3–32.
   Google Scholar
• González Fuster, G., P. De Hert, and S. Gutwirth. 2011. “Privacy and Data Protection in the EU-Security Continuum.” IN:EX/CEPS Policy Briefs, No. 12, 2011. Accessed June 22, 2013. http://works.bepress.com/serge_gutwirth/71
   Google Scholar
• Goold, B. 2010. “How Much Surveillance is Too Much? Some Thoughts on Surveillance, Democracy, and the Political Value of Privacy.” In Surveillance in a Constitutional Government, edited by D. W. Schartum, 38–48. Fagbokforlaget.
   Google Scholar
• HEW (US Department of Health Education and Welfare). 1973. Records, Computers and the Rights of Citizens. Washington, DC: Report of the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Automated Personal Data Systems. July. [Online] Accessed June 22, 2013. http://epic.org/privacy/hew1973report/
   Google Scholar
• Home Office. 1972. Report of the Committee on Privacy. London: Rt. Hon. Kenneth Younger, Chairman, HMSO.
   Google Scholar
• ICO (Information Commissioner's Office). 2009. Privacy Impact Assessment Handbook, Version 2.0, Cheshire, UK: Wilmslow. June.
   Google Scholar
• ICO (Information Commissioner's Office). 2014. “Privacy impact assessments code published”, News release, Feb 25. http://ico.org.uk/news/latest_news/2014/privacy-impact-assessments-code-published
   Google Scholar
• ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 2011. Information technology — Security techniques — Privacy framework, ISO/IEC 29100. 1st ed. Geneva: International Standard. 15 Dec.
   Google Scholar
• Jacoby, N. 2007. “Redefining the Right to Be Let Alone: Privacy Rights and the Constitutionality of Technical Surveillance Measures in Germany and the United States.” Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law 35 (3): 433–493.
   Google Scholar
• Marx, G. T. 1998. “An Ethics for the New Surveillance.” The Information Society 14 (3): 171–186. doi: 10.1080/019722498128809
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marx, G. T. 2012. “Privacy is Not Quite Like the Weather.” In Privacy Impact Assessment, edited by D. Wright and P. De Hert, v–xiv. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• OCIPO (Office of the Chief Information and Privacy Officer). 2010. Privacy Impact Assessment Guide for the Ontario Public Service. Queen's Printer for Ontario.
   Google Scholar
• OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 1980. OECD Guidelines on the Protection of Privacy and Transborder Flows of Personal Data. Paris, 23 September. Accessed June 22, 2013. http://www.oecd.org/internet/ieconomy/oecdguidelinesontheprotectionofprivacyandtransborderflowsofpersonaldata.htm#recommendation
   Google Scholar
• OVPC (Office of the Victorian Privacy Commissioner). 2009. Privacy Impact Assessments, A guide for the Victorian Public Sector, Edition 2, April.
   Google Scholar
• Prosser, W. L. 1960. “Privacy.” California Law Review 48 (3): 383–423. doi: 10.2307/3478805
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pounder, C. 2008. “Nine Principles for Assessing Whether Privacy is Protected in a Surveillance Society.” IDIS 1 (1): 1–22. doi: 10.1007/s12394-008-0002-2
   Google Scholar
• Raab, C. 2005. “The Future of Privacy Protection.” In Trust and Crime in Information Societies, edited by R. Mansell and B. Collins, 282–318. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Raab, C. 2012. “Regulating Surveillance: The Importance of Principles.” In Routledge Handbook of Surveillance Studies, edited by K. Ball, K. D. Haggerty, and D. Lyon, 377–385. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Raab, C., and D. Wright. 2012. “Surveillance: Extending the Limits of Privacy Impact Assessment.” In Privacy Impact Assessment, edited by D. Wright and P. De Hert, 363–383. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, N., H. Graux, M. Botterman, and L. Valeri. 2009. Review of the EU Data Protection Directive. Cambridge: RAND Europe.
   Google Scholar
• Schoeman, F. D., ed. 1986. Philosophical Dimensions of Privacy: An Anthology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scottish Government. 2011. Identity Management and Privacy Principles. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2010/12/PrivacyPrinciples
   Google Scholar
• Solove, D. J. 2006. “A Taxonomy of Privacy.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 154 (3): 477–560. doi: 10.2307/40041279
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spiekermann, S. 2012. “The RFID PIA – Developed by Industry, Endorsed by Regulators.” In Privacy Impact Assessment, edited by D. Wright and P. De Hert, 323–346. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Talevski, J., and H. Osman. 2013. “Privacy Act Reforms to Hit.” PC Advisor, 6 June. Accessed June 22, 2013. http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/network-wifi/3451166/privacy-act-reforms-to-hit/
   Google Scholar
• Task Force on Privacy and Computers. 1972. Privacy and Computers. Ottawa: Departments of Communication and Justice, Information Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Wenar, L. 2011. “Rights.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2011 Edition), edited by E. N. Zalta. Accessed June 22, 2013. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2011/entries/rights/
   Google Scholar
• Wright, D. 2014. “How Good are PIA Reports – and Where are They?.” European Business Law Review 26 (3), May.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, D., and C. Raab. 2012. “Constructing a Surveillance Impact Assessment.” Computer Law & Security Review 28 (6): 613–626. doi: 10.1016/j.clsr.2012.09.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar