2000
DOI: 10.2307/1229515
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Information Privacy/Information Property

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 80 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For an analysis of the scope of the Coase theorem in the presence of private information, see Farrell (1987). 10 For related work on property rights over personal information, see Litman (2000), Samuelson (2000), and Schwartz (2004).…”
Section: The Second Wavementioning
confidence: 99%
“…For an analysis of the scope of the Coase theorem in the presence of private information, see Farrell (1987). 10 For related work on property rights over personal information, see Litman (2000), Samuelson (2000), and Schwartz (2004).…”
Section: The Second Wavementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Applying the psychological contract lens to understanding these parallel streams of research offers a unified predictive framework that encompasses factors that can undermine the sustainability of social networks. While research in legal studies has emphasized the significant overlap in legal protections of privacy and intellectual property (Litman, 2000) and research in interpersonal psychology has pointed out the importance of control over personal information for psychological wellbeing (Meyer, 1989), we offer an integrated view that indicates that both intellectual property and privacy concerns play an important role in shaping social network users' attitudes and behavioral intentions.…”
Section: Theoretical Contributionsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…;Lessig 2002, 250;Hettinger 1989, 45;Geuss 2001, 103;Sofsky 2007, 95f. ;Solove 2008, 26-28;Moore 2008, 420;Kang 1998;Litman 2000;Westin 1967, 324-325;Varian 1997;Samuelson 2000), but has rarely been analysed critically (exception : Fuchs 2011b).…”
Section: Dominant Theories Of Privacy: Individual Control Exclusionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Whereas privacy can, though ought not, be seen as an inalienable right, private property reasonably cannot (Andrew 1985, 529;Pateman 2002, 20-21;Litman 2000Litman , 1295Litman -1297. The closer privacy comes to private property, the more privacy is alienable or exchangeable, becoming itself a commodity.…”
Section: The Political Aspect: Privacy and Class Dominationmentioning
confidence: 99%