PogoWasRight.org

Menu
  • About
  • Privacy
Menu

Article of Note: The Boundaries of Privacy Harm

Posted on July 18, 2010July 3, 2025 by Dissent

Ryan Calo has an article on SSRN that may provide food for thought for many readers.

Calo, M. Ryan, The Boundaries of Privacy Harm (July 16, 2010). Available at SSRN: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1641487

Just as a burn is an injury caused by heat, so is privacy harm a unique injury with specific boundaries and characteristics. This Essay describes privacy harm as falling into two related categories. The subjective category of privacy harm is the unwanted perception of observation. This category describes unwelcome mental states—anxiety, embarrassment, fear—that stem from the belief that one is being watched or monitored. Examples include everything from a landlord listening in on his tenants to generalized government surveillance.

The objective category of privacy harm is the unanticipated or coerced use of information concerning a person against that person. These are negative, external actions justified by reference to personal information. Examples include identity theft, the leaking of classified information that reveals an undercover agent, and the use of a drunk-driving suspect’s blood as evidence against him.

The subjective and objective categories of privacy harm are distinct but related. Just as assault is the apprehension of battery, so is the unwanted perception of observation largely an apprehension of information-driven injury. The categories represent, respectively, the anticipation and consequence of a loss of control over personal information.

The approach offers several advantages. It uncouples privacy harm from privacy violations, demonstrating that no person need commit a privacy violation for privacy harm to occur (and vice versa). It creates a “limiting principle” capable of revealing when another value—autonomy or equality, for instance—is more directly at stake. It also creates a “rule of recognition” that permits the identification of a privacy harm when no other harm is apparent. Finally, the approach permits the sizing and redress of privacy harm in novel ways.

The full article is available as a free download from SSRN.

[link to SSRN corrected/fixed]

Related posts:

  • How Do You Define ‘Privacy Harm’?
Category: BreachesFeatured NewsMisc

Post navigation

← A Good Day for Email Privacy: A Court Takes Back its Earlier, Bad Ruling in Rehberg v. Paulk
Rep. Rush unveils privacy bill →

Now more than ever

Search

Contact Me

Email: info@pogowasright.org

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Categories

Recent Posts

  • White House ordered to restore Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood clinics
  • California Attorney General Announces $1.55M CCPA Settlement with Healthline.com
  • Canada’s Bill C-2 Opens the Floodgates to U.S. Surveillance
  • Wiretap Suits Pit Old Privacy Laws Against New AI Technology
  • Action against tiny Scottish charity sparks huge ICO row
  • Congress tries to outlaw AI that jacks up prices based on what it knows about you
  • Microsoft’s controversial Recall feature is now blocked by Brave and AdGuard

RSS Recent Posts on DataBreaches.net

  • Scattered Spider Hijacks VMware ESXi to Deploy Ransomware on Critical U.S. Infrastructure
  • Hacker group “Silent Crow” claims responsibility for cyberattack on Russia’s Aeroflot
  • AIIMS ORBO Portal Vulnerability Exposing Sensitive Organ Donor Data Discovered by Researcher
  • Two Data Breaches in Three Years: McKenzie Health
  • Scattered Spider is running a VMware ESXi hacking spree
©2025 PogoWasRight.org. All rights reserved.
Menu
  • About
  • Privacy