Collaborative consent: Harnessing the strengths of the Internet for consent in the online environment

International Review of Law, Computers and Technology

Volumn 24, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 287-297

  Bernal, Paul ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Behavioural advertising; Consent; Internet

Indexed keywords

EID: 78649249110     PISSN: 13600869     EISSN: 13646885     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13600869.2010.522335     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. P. Bernal, 'Web 2.5: The Symbiotic Web', Inter- national Review of Law, Computers & Technology 24 (2010): 25-37.
2. R. Clayton, 'The Phorm Webwise System', (2008). http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~ rnc1/080518-phorm.pdf (accessed 8 May 2010)
3. Clayton's blog on http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/ (accessed 8 May 2010).
4. N. Bohm, 'The Phorm Webwise System - a Legal Analysis', Foundation for Information Policy Reseach, Sandy, Bedordshire, UK, 2008.
5. http://www.out-law.com/page-10929 (accessed 8 May 2010). The new terms and conditions included: 'By placing an order via this website on the first day of the fourth month of the year 2010 Anno Domini, you agree to grant us a non transferable option to claim, for now and for ever more, your immortal soul'.
6. For the European Action see http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/09/ 570&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en (accessed 8 May 2010)
7. OFT investigation see http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/aug/20/internet-targeted-advertising-oft-investigation (accessed 8 May 2010)
8. Comms report see http://www.apcomms.org.uk/uploads/apComms_Final_Report.pdf (accessed 8 May 2010).
9. See for example http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/09/facebook-settles-beacon-lawsuit.html. (accessed 8 May 2010)
10. For example in ProCD v. Zeidenberg, 86 F.3d 1447 (7th Cir. 1996)
11. Specht v. Netscape Communications Corp., 150 F.Supp.2d 585 (S.D.N.Y. 2001).
12. Thornton v. Shoe Lane Parking Ltd [1971] 2 QB 163
13. Parker v. South Eastern Railway Co. [1877] 2 CP 416
14. McCutcheon v. David McBrayne Ltd [1964] 1 W.L.R. 125
15. Watkins v. Rymill [1833] 10 QB 178,188
16. Thompson v. London, Midland and Scottish Railway Co. [1930] 1 KB 41, 47.
17. Working Party on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data ('the Article 29 Data Protection Working Party'), Brussels, Opinion 148, p. 17.
18. http://www.google.co.uk/privacypolicy.html (accessed 8 May 2010).
19. J. Turow, J. King, C.J. Hoofnagle, A. Bleakley and M. Hennessy, 'Americans Reject Tailored Advertising'. Annenberg: University of Pennsylvania, 2009.
20. H. Teff, Reasonable Care: Legal Perspectives on the Doctor-Patient Relationship (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994), 198.
21. A.D. Murray, The Regulation of Cyberspace: Control in the Online Environment (Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2006), particularly Ch. 8.
22. The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) Privacy Notices Code of Practice, p. 9, downloadable from http://www.ico.gov.uk/for_organisations/topic_specific_guides/privacy_notices.aspx (accessed 8 May 2010).
23. The Google dashboard is accessed through the Google Privacy Center (http://www.google.com/privacy.html, accessed 8 May 2010).
24. For a brief discussion of how it works, see http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2009/11/google-dashboard.html (accessed 8 May 2010).
25. Google Ads Preferences see http://www.google.com/ads/preferences (accessed 8 May 2010).