Abstract
In interacting with digital apps and services, users create digital iden- tities and generate massive amounts of associated personal data. The relationship between the user and the service provider in such cases is, inter alia, a principal- agent relationship governed by a ‘contract’. This contract is provided mostly in natural language text, however, and remains opaque to users. The need of the hour is multi-faceted documentation represented in machine-readable, natural language and graphical formats, to enable tools such as smart contracts and privacy assistants which could assist users in negotiating and monitoring agreements.
In this paper, we develop a Taxonomy for the Representation of Privacy and Data Control Signals. We focus on ‘signals’ because they play a crucial role in communicating how a service provider distinguishes itself in a market. We follow the methodology for developing taxonomies proposed by Nickerson et al. We start with a grounded analysis of the documentation of four smartphone-based fitness activity trackers, and compare these to insights from literature. We present the re- sults of the first two iterations of the design cycle. Validation shows that the Tax- onomy answers (10/14) relevant questions from Perera et al.’s requirements for the knowledge-modelling of privacy policies fully, (2/14) partially, and fails to answer (2/14). It also covers signals not identified by the checklist. We also validate the Taxonomy by applying it to extracts from documentation, and argue that it shows potential for the annotation and evaluation of privacy policies as well
In this paper, we develop a Taxonomy for the Representation of Privacy and Data Control Signals. We focus on ‘signals’ because they play a crucial role in communicating how a service provider distinguishes itself in a market. We follow the methodology for developing taxonomies proposed by Nickerson et al. We start with a grounded analysis of the documentation of four smartphone-based fitness activity trackers, and compare these to insights from literature. We present the re- sults of the first two iterations of the design cycle. Validation shows that the Tax- onomy answers (10/14) relevant questions from Perera et al.’s requirements for the knowledge-modelling of privacy policies fully, (2/14) partially, and fails to answer (2/14). It also covers signals not identified by the checklist. We also validate the Taxonomy by applying it to extracts from documentation, and argue that it shows potential for the annotation and evaluation of privacy policies as well
Original language | English |
---|---|
Title of host publication | Legal Knowledge and Information Systems |
Subtitle of host publication | Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems (JURIX 2020) |
Publisher | IOS Press |
Pages | 23-32 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2020 |
Event | 33rd International Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems - , Czech Republic Duration: 9 Dec 2020 → 11 Dec 2020 |
Publication series
Name | Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications |
---|---|
Volume | 334 |
Conference
Conference | 33rd International Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems |
---|---|
Abbreviated title | JURIX 2020 |
Country/Territory | Czech Republic |
Period | 9/12/20 → 11/12/20 |