The Paradox of Data Ownership on Privacy
Imagine for a moment you are walking down the street, see a friend, and stop to chat. You later tell a mutual friend about the meeting. Most of us would find little problem with such a scenario.
Now imagine you walk into a retail store and the store’s camera sees you. The camera uploads your image to an application that uses artificial intelligence to identify you and accesses a huge data warehouse for retailers to pull up your retail history with it and other local stores. Many of us would find the latter a little discomforting.
Yet, what is the fundamental difference? In both cases, an observation occurred. In both cases, that observation is shared with mutual acquaintances. In both cases, the information is used. So why would we be comfortable with one and not the other?
Observation and Data Ownership
There lies a dichotomy in privacy between ownership and observation of data. It all comes down to who observes what.
On the one hand, we believe that anything we personally observe is now in our minds and available for us to do with as we please. Our observations becomes part of our memory – part of who you are. As such, we believe we should have unlimited license to use that information. If I see a person, I can act accordingly. If I observe their actions, I can act accordingly. We may willingly forgo using that observation out of respect or promises, but ultimately, its a personal choice. In essence, we “own” the information we observe and expect others to recognize that ownership.
On the other hand, we believe that when others observe us, we want to maintain control over that information. They should not be allowed to use or share that information without our permission. Our conception of privacy arises from this belief. We become aggrieved if others use our personal information in ways we do not approve. We may give a pass for friends and family, but even there, we have limits. Ultimately, we “own” the information about ourselves and expect others to respect that ownership.
“For me, but not for thee”
And therein lies the dichotomy. We own our observations, but often believe others do not own their observations. At least not observations about us. If we see something, we want to be able to act on it without external restrictions. If someone sees something about us, we want them to ask first before acting on it.
This difference in ownership beliefs have left our conception of privacy a mess. This is particularly noted in how our legal system deals with privacy. Businesses claim that they own all the data they observe about their customers, while customers cry that their privacy continues to be violated from over sharing and usage. Privacy advocates want greater regulations on what businesses can be allowed to do, yet governmental agencies would be happy to limit security around personal information.
With increased capabilities of information systems, observation, usage and sharing of personal information has exploded. Social media pushes privacy expectations to its limits, constantly encouraging us to disclose more. Other tech companies fight to limit privacy violations. Some tech companies take privacy very seriously while others give it only a modicum of attention.
A way out
Is there a way out of this dichotomy?
I don’t know. But over the next few months, that’s what I want to work on. In a paper I wrote 5 years ago, I started thinking about this. Based on some research published by Amy Peikoff, a solution will likely emerge from a proper conception of rights. I would be happy to hear your thoughts as well. Please share in the comments below.
