Privacy comes at a price.
Articles on Privacy law
Displaying 21 - 40 of 112 articles
OpenAI has said it will take down the ChatGPT voice of Sky, which left Scarlett Johansson in ‘disbelief’. The actor previously played the role of an AI in the 2013 film Her.
A new ACCC report shows 74% of Australians are uncomfortable with their personal data being shared or sold. Yet this is happening every day, and the privacy law isn’t being enforced.
Wearables are on the rise, including a new category: neurotechnology. A headband that can track your brain activity sounds fun, but the data it collects should be stringently protected.
Even those who seek out the spotlight have a legal right to privacy.
Many people have become resigned to the fact that tech companies collect our private data. But policymakers must do more to limit the amount of personal information corporations can collect.
When schools ask student-athletes about their menstrual cycles, they may be infringing on anti-discrimination and privacy laws.
ChatGPT is fuelled by our intimate online histories. It’s trained on 300 billion words, yet users have no way of knowing which of their data it contains.
The terms of the Australian Privacy Principle 3.6 are quite clear. So why is there not a single published case of this law being enforced?
Data collection is big business in the US, but a bipartisan data privacy bill rapidly moving through Congress promises to affect the information websites, social media platforms and all other businesses collect.
Private companies and public authorities are beginning to implement facial recognition technology, even without rules to govern what they can do.
The Supreme Court has found protections for people’s privacy in several constitutional amendments – and used it as a basis for some pretty fundamental protections.
Australia’s consumer advocacy group Choice identified three Australian retailers who use facial recognition to identify consumers. What are the privacy concerns?
Both Macron and Madonna have expressed concerns about genetic privacy. As DNA collection and sequencing becomes increasingly commonplace, what may seem paranoid may instead be prescient.
The laws about cookies are fairly clear in EU and UK, but many big companies are breaking them anyway.
How the UK Court of Appeal reached its decision.
A proposed online privacy code would give consumers more control over how tech companies collect and use their data
A UK court recently ruled that a man’s smart doorbell invaded his neighbour’s privacy, and he now faces being required to pay damages. But this kind of situation is avoidable.
With proof of vaccination likely to become mandatory for travel – and possibly other activities – a careful balancing of individual and collective rights will be essential.
Parties who design the technologies and platforms on which mobile apps are built and marketed must be brought within the legal accountability framework to close the privacy loop.
Top contributors
-
Associate Professor, School of Law, University of Canberra
-
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law & Justice; Lead, UNSW Public Interest Law & Tech Initiative, UNSW
-
Associate Professor, Melbourne Law School, The University of Melbourne
-
Professor specialising in Internet law, Bond University
-
Sessional Academic, Faculty of Law, Monash University
-
PhD Law Candidate, University of New England
-
Fellow of the Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Technology Sydney
-
Associate Professor in Law, Monash University
-
Emeritus Professor in Law and Criminal Justice, Adelaide University
-
Associate Professor of Information; Associate Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Michigan
-
Professor in Media and Communication, Goldsmiths, University of London
-
Honorary Professor, Macquarie Law School, Macquarie University
-
Professor of law and ethics, Georgia State University
-
Professor of Business Law and Ethics, Indiana University
-
Distinguished Professor and C. Ben Dutton Professor of Law, Indiana University