...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The John Marshall journal of computer and information law >CONTROL OVER PERSONAL DATA, PRIVACY AND ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION IN EUROPE AND THE USA: THE PARADOX OF ITALIAN 'DATA PROTECTION AUTHORITY'
【24h】

CONTROL OVER PERSONAL DATA, PRIVACY AND ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION IN EUROPE AND THE USA: THE PARADOX OF ITALIAN 'DATA PROTECTION AUTHORITY'

机译：在欧洲和美国，对个人数据，隐私和行政自由裁量权的控制：意大利“数据保护机构”的悖论

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

It has become clear that we must reformulate our original juxtaposition of privacy in the Old World as the expression of human dignity and privacy in the United States as the expression of freedom from governmental intrusions. As the Italian example shows, the prevalent theory that justifies the recognition of the right to privacy with the demand that one be able to self-determine one's personal data, thereby making this action a manifestation of the power to exercise control over the circulation of one's personal information is not fully confirmed either by European or national legislation in Italy. Perhaps it is true, as Whitman asserts, that American citizens reserve the preoccupation that Europeans harbor for aggression by the media for the risk of the inviolability of the home attempted by governmental agencies. Nonetheless, the socio-legal critique makes it doubtful that the legislation inspired by European Directives may lead to effective control by social actors of their personal data. Furthermore, we must carefully reconsider the current opinion that in Europe, thanks to its different legal culture, legislation in the name of individual privacy has been developed that is more stringent than its American counterpart, which seeks to reduce the possibility of intrusion into one's private life by other private subjects (not only by the press and mass media but also by entrepreneurs who are able to collect and rework the personal data that we all disseminate daily in the course of everyday life). In the light of our study, this opinion, too, has many grey areas and conceals bold paradoxes upon which the socio-legal critique can shed light.
机译：显然，我们必须将旧世界中隐私的原始并置重新表达为人类尊严的表达，而美国将隐私重新表达为不受政府干预的表达。如意大利的例子所示，普遍的理论证明了对隐私权的承认是合理的，要求人们能够自我确定个人数据，从而使这一行动成为行使对个人流通的控制权的体现。欧洲或意大利国内法律并未完全确认您的个人信息。正如惠特曼所断言的那样，也许美国公民保留了欧洲人对媒体进行侵略的关注，这是真的，因为政府机构企图破坏房屋的风险。尽管如此，对社会法律的批评使人们怀疑，受欧洲指令启发的立法是否可能导致社会行为者有效控制其个人数据。此外，我们必须谨慎地重新考虑当前的观点，即在欧洲，由于其不同的法律文化，以个人隐私名义制定的立法比美国的立法更为严格，该立法试图减少侵入个人隐私的可能性。其他私人主题的生活（不仅是新闻媒体和大众媒体，还有能够收集和修改我们在日常生活中每天传播的个人数据的企业家）。根据我们的研究，这种观点也有许多灰色地带，掩盖了大胆的悖论，社会法律批判可以使之暴露出来。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号