Revamping Privacy: From Consent to Accountability in Big Data
Written on
Chapter 1: The Flaws of Current Privacy Models
For years, the core principles of privacy regulations have centered around giving individuals authority over their data through three primary decisions: whether to share their information, how it can be utilized, and who has access to it. However, this approach has become antiquated in the context of big data, where numerous unforeseen applications of user data now exist that were unimaginable at the time of data collection.
This traditional model fails to provide adequate protection for privacy, as the framework hasn’t evolved alongside the innovative ways in which parties might misuse or exploit user data.
The main issue with these original principles is that they disproportionately place responsibility on the individual who generates the data. It operates under the assumption that users, by providing "informed consent," can foresee all possible scenarios in which their data may be processed or utilized. This assumption is not only overly simplistic but can also be seen as manipulative.
Have you ever taken the time to read the fine print of data privacy agreements? If you have, you likely noticed that it often reduces to vague and broad usage statements, allowing consent for categories like “Analytics” or “Enhanced Advertising Experience,” without clear definitions.
While one might suggest that clearer consent terms could resolve these issues, this is impractical. Even data consumers struggle to anticipate all potential future use cases when drafting these agreements. Additionally, legal professionals often avoid specificity to ensure the consent remains relevant over time.
Chapter 2: A New Paradigm for Privacy in the Big Data Age
We require a revised model that strikes a better balance. Envision a scenario where, instead of solely asking individuals to consent to data usage, we also require accountability from data consumers, such as large corporations.
In this envisioned framework, companies would need to evaluate each use case to determine if the processing of individuals’ data would yield positive or negative outcomes. This model emphasizes responsibility at the point of action (POA).
Not only does this approach promote fairness, but it also scales effectively. The process can be streamlined as future privacy regulations continue to define broad categories of data usage. For specific cases that fall outside these general definitions, this accountability model compels large companies to scrutinize those situations rather than simply covering them under general consent.
A Win-Win for Individuals and Companies
This new framework would provide enhanced protection for individuals who consent to data use, while also benefiting data consumers. Companies would have the freedom to explore secondary applications of personal data without needing to continually seek explicit permission from individuals, thus improving scalability. Conversely, ineffective implementation of big data usage evaluations could expose these companies to legal repercussions, thereby instilling a sense of accountability.
Shifting the focus of responsibility from data generators to data consumers is significant for multiple reasons. Primarily, data users possess a deeper understanding than both individuals and regulators regarding their intended use of the data. By conducting self-assessments, they can maintain confidentiality about their business objectives, avoiding external scrutiny from third parties or governmental bodies. Furthermore, since data users are the primary beneficiaries of secondary data applications, it is only fair that they bear the responsibility for their actions.
In summary, transitioning from individual consent to data-user accountability is crucial in our era of big data, where the potential for misuse of original data collection practices is heightened by the incentives for secondary data usage.