Protecting privacy with “heightened” notice and choice

Nehf, James P.

doi:10.4337/9781783479924.00043

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Jim Nehf explores alternatives to the aging notice-and-choice regime for protecting privacy online. 31 Shaun Spencer considers the implications of predictive analytics for electronic commerce. 32 And Asma Vranaki presents some results of her empirical study of investigations of cloud computing service providers by European data protection authorities.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction

Rothchild¹

2016

Research Handbook on Electronic Commerce Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

If this were a book about some long-established, traditional, or otherwise well-defined area of law-a common law field such as contracts, say, or a regulatory area like environmental law-there would be no call for the editor to define the subject matter, or to seek to justify it. To offer a book on electronic commerce law, however, is to invite the questions: Does such a field of law actually exist? What justification is there for treating this field as a coherent body of law?We must first understand what electronic commerce is. Although different definitions of the term may be appropriate in different contexts, 1 for purposes of this book electronic commerce consists of commercial activity that is accomplished with some substantial involvement of the Internet. The inception of electronic commerce may be dated to 1995, when the U.S. National Science Foundation privatized its internetworking project, the NSFNet, eliminating the acceptable use policy that had restricted the network's use to noncommercial purposes. It was in that year that Amazon.com, craigslist, and eBay got their start. The early, influential judicial decisions dealing with ecommerce issues began arriving in the mid-1990s-or a bit earlier, if we expand the scope to include legal issues arising from the use of proprietary online services like America Online, CompuServe, and Prodigy. In contracting, for example, ProCD v. Zeidenberg 2 validated the procedure of money-now, terms-later contracts, which paved the way for online clickwrap contracts. With respect to intermediary liability, Religious Technology Center v. Netcom 3 applied a volition requirement to limit the scope of direct liability, while Cubby v. CompuServe 4 assimilated online intermediaries to the rules applying to distributors rather than the more exacting standard applying to publishers for purposes of defamation liability. Some of the foundational cases addressing judicial jurisdiction over online conduct, including CompuServe v. Patterson 5 and Zippo Mfg. Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, 6 were alsoThe term is often used more broadly to include Electronic Data Interchange, a closed electronic messaging system used between businesses that became standardized in the 1970s.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%