Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Why the NSA didn’t diminish your privacy but might have violated your right to privacy.Lauritz Munch - forthcoming - Analysis.
    According to a popular view, privacy is a function of people not knowing or rationally believing some fact about you. But intuitively it seems possible for a perpetrator to violate your right to privacy without learning any facts about you. For example, it seems plausible to say that the US National Security Agency’s PRISM program violated, or could have violated, the privacy rights of the people whose information was collected, despite the fact that the NSA, for the most part, merely (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Privacy Rights, and Why Negative Control is Not a Dead End: A Reply to Munch and Lundgren.Jakob Thrane Mainz & Rasmus Uhrenfeldt - 2021 - Res Publica 28 (2):391-400.
    Lauritz Munch and Björn Lundgren have recently replied to a paper published by us in this journal. In our original paper, we defended a novel version of the so-called ‘control theory’ of the moral right to privacy. We argued that control theorists should define ‘control’ as what we coined ‘Negative Control’. Munch and Lundgren have recently provided a range of interesting and challenging objections to our view. Independently of each other, they give almost identical counterexamples to our definition of Negative (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations