Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
FIGURE 5.1
Warren and Brandeis argued that the legal system should protect people's “right
to be let alone.”
(PhamousFotos/Splash News/Newscom)
over the ways in which information about themselves is revealed. However, cameras and
other devices are capable of capturing information about a person without that person's
consent (Figure 5.1).
Warren and Brandeis pointed out that the right to privacy had already been rec-
ognized by French law. They urged the American legal system to recognize the right to
privacy, which they called “the right to be let alone” [17]. Their reasoning was highly in-
fluential. Though it took decades, the right to privacy is now recognized in courts across
America [18].
THOMSON: EVERY “PRIVACY RIGHT” VIOLATION IS A
VIOLATION OF ANOTHER RIGHT
Judith Jarvis Thomson has a completely different view about a right to privacy. She
writes: “Perhaps the most striking thing about the right to privacy is that nobody seems
to have any very clear idea what it is” [19]. Thomson points out problems with defining
privacy as “the right to be let alone,” as Warren and Brandeis have done. In some
respects, this definition of privacy is too narrow. Suppose the police use an X-ray device
and supersensitive microphones to monitor the movements and conversations of Smith
in his home. The police have not touched Smith or even come close to him. He has no
knowledge they are monitoring him. The police have let Smith alone, yet people who
believe in a right to privacy would surely argue that they have violated Smith's privacy.
