Explore the vast range of titles available.

This chapter introduces basic concepts related to Internet of Things (IoT) data privacy, and discusses the approaches to IoT data privacy. It then describes the Privacy Preference Manager (PPM), which is an IoT data platform component that can provide data privacy by registering users’ consent and privacy preferences, providing a way to modify or update them, providing rules for data flow according to users’ preferences, and recording all transactions. Next, the chapter discusses how the emergence of IoT is impacting data privacy, and describes some existing approaches to address both online‐ and IoT‐related privacy. It further provides information on a generalized personal data handling architecture for IoT that fulfills the requirements identified along with a description of how this has been realized by the oneM2M IoT platform standard and in particular its PPM component.

Despite previous examinations of business actions, consumer reactions, and regulatory efforts, there has been no direct comparison of consumer and marketer expectations for establishing and respecting privacy boundaries. This study directly compares consumer segments' and marketers' expectations for privacy boundaries that regulate marketers' access to consumers and their information. Using data from a national online survey, the authors compare three consumer segments' preferences regarding the boundaries for the use of eight information technologies (cookies, biometrics, loyalty cards, radio frequency identification, text messaging, pop-up advertisements, telemarketing, and spam) with survey results of marketing managers and database vendors for the same set of questions. The results identify consumer segments and technologies for which consumer expectations differ from marketers and, thus, for which more regulatory and public policy attention and research scholarship is needed.

The district court failed to acknowledge established case law of the Fifth Circuit regarding Fourth Amendment rights in the context of student athletes in school locker rooms, which has recognized that \"[b]y choosing to go out for the team, [student athletes] voluntarily subject themselves to a degree of regulation even higher than that imposed on students generally.\" Since the court found lacking any controlling authority that clearly established a constitutional right for the child under the Fourth Amendment, the court found that the coaches were entitled to qualified immunity on the Fourth Amendment claim.