Principles for protecting privacy

Cato Journal

Volumn 22, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 13-31

  Cate, Fred H ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34547799927     PISSN: 02733072     EISSN: 02733072     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (27)

1. American Bankers Association (2001) "ABA Survey Shows Nearly One Out of Three Consumers Read Their Banks' Privacy Notices." ABA News Release, 15 June.
2. Bartnicki v. Vopper (2001) 532 U. S. 514.
3. Brief for Petitioner and Interveners (2000) U. S. West, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission: 15-16. 182 F.3d 1224, 1239 (10th Cir. 1999) (No. 98-9518), cert. denied 528 U. S. 1188.
4. Edenfield v. Fane (1993) 507 U. S. 761.
5. Ernst & Young LLP (2000) Customer Benefits from Current Information Sharing by Financial Services Companies (December). New York.
6. Federal Trade Commission (2000) Privacy Online: Fair Information Practices in the Electronic Marketplace-A Report to Congress. Washington, DC.
7. Federal Trade Commission (2001) "Workshop on the Information Marketplace: Merging and Exchanging Consumer Data." Washington, D.C. (31 March).
8. Fitch IBCA (2000) HIPAA: Wake-Up Call for Health Care Providers. New York: FitchRatings.
9. Kirchheimer, R. (2000) "Report Predicts Huge HIPAA Price Tag." Modern Healthcare (2 October): 48.
10. LaFalce, J. (2000) Statement at Democrat News Conference on Financial Privacy. Washington, D.C. (4 May).
11. Lew, J. (1999) Memorandum from OMB Director, Memorandum M-99-18 (2 June).
12. Litan, R. E. (1999) "Balancing Costs and Benefits of new Privacy Mandates." Working Paper 99-3, AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies.
13. Martin v. Struthers (1943) 319 U. S. 141.
14. National Association of Attorneys General (2000) Draft Statement on Privacy Principles and Background. Washington, D.C. (11 December).
15. Robert E. Nolan Company, Inc. (1999) Common Components of Confidentiality Legislation-Cost and Impact Analysis. Dallas.
16. Rubinstein, H. G. (1999) "If I Am Only for Myself, What Am I? A Communitarian Look at the Privacy Stalemate." American Journal of Law and Medicine 25: 203-31.
17. Safire, W. (1999) "Nosy Parker Lives." New York Times (23 September): A9.
18. Smith v. Maryland (1979) 442 U. S. 735.
19. Star Systems (2001) "Financial Privacy: Beyond Title V of Gramm-Leach-Bliley." Star Systems Industry Research (November). (www.star-systems.com/news-industryresearch.html.)
20. Terry v. Ohio (1968) 392 U.S. 1.
21. U. S. Congress (1999) "Financial Privacy." Hearings before the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit of the Committee on Banking and Financial Services, House of Representatives, 106th Cong., 1st Sess. (20 July) (statement of Richard A. Barton). (Available at www. house.gov/banking/72099rba.htm.)
22. U. S. General Accounting Office (2000) "Federal Agencies' Fair Information Practices." GAO/AIMD-00-296R.
23. U. S. West, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission (1999) 182 F.3d 1224 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1188 (2000).
24. Walker, K. (2001) "Where Everybody Knows Your Name: A Pragmatic Look at the Costs of Privacy and the Benefits of Information Exchange." Stanford Technology Law Review. (http://stlr.stanford.edu/stlr/articles/ 00_stlr_2.)
25. West, D. M. (2000) Assessing E-Government: The Internet, Democracy, and Service Delivery by State and Federal Governments (September). (www.brown.edu/Departments/Taubman_Center//polreports/ egovtreport00. html#Security.)
26. Westin, A. (1967) Privacy and Freedom. New York: Atheneum.
27. Whalen v. Roe (1977) 429 U. S. 589.