60 likes | 196 Views
“Social Networks, Privacy and Freedom of Association”. Professor Peter Swire Ohio State University Center for American Progress TPRC September 25, 2011. Overview. Linguistics: “network” and “association” Growing practice of associating through social networks 1 st Amendment doctrine
E N D
“Social Networks, Privacy and Freedom of Association” Professor Peter Swire Ohio State University Center for American Progress TPRC September 25, 2011
Overview • Linguistics: “network” and “association” • Growing practice of associating through social networks • 1st Amendment doctrine • NAACP v. Alabama • Rights vs. Rights in personal information
“Network” & “Association” • Linguistics: “network” and “association” • Also, “links”, “relationships” • Online networks as locus of political mobilization • Egypt, Tunisia, Arab spring • Obama campaign: New Media, and get friends to get friends to knock on doors • A different “progressive” view of privacy • Tea Party • Senator Brown; not a left/right split
1st Amendment Doctrine • “Expressive” rather than “Intimate” association • Strict scrutiny. State action ok if • Compelling state interests • Unrelated to the suppression of ideas • That cannot be achieved through means significantly less restrictive of associational freedom • To date, no holding that have the wider range of state action permitted under the “time, place, and manner” aspects of free speech • Issue: legal mandate of “privacy by design” • Challenge: Plaintiff is a political campaign or non-profit, and wants “outreach by design” • Issue: Do Not Track • Exception for political campaigns and non-profits, as with Do Not Call?
NAACP v. Alabama • A different branch of freedom of association law • State of Alabama wanted membership list of NAACP members • Alabama lost due to freedom of association of the NAACP members • This holding reinforced privacy • Topic of new paper: when association law in conflict with privacy
Rights vs. Rights • Usual statement, in E.U. and more broadly • Fundamental/human right to privacy protection • Rights of the data subject • Form of the argument: the individual’s rights should outweigh utility (cost/benefit) arguments, and privacy should win • Additional point today • Fundamental right of freedom of association can be limited if the state protects privacy • Form of the argument: the individual’s rights to privacy (limit social networking sharing) are contrasted with an individual’s right to form and further associations (expand social networking sharing) • Similar to Volokh’s “right to speak truthfully” about another person • Here, the distinct “right to associate effectively” is at issue