Global Privacy Protection
Show Less

Global Privacy Protection

The First Generation

Edited by James B. Rule

Global Privacy Protection reviews the origins and history of national privacy codes as social, political and legal phenomena in Australia, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Hungary, South Korea and the United States. The first chapter reviews key international statements on privacy rights, such as the OECD, EU and APEC principles. In the following chapters, the seven national case studies present and analyze the widest variety of ‘privacy stories’ in an equally varied array of countries. They look beyond the details of what current national data-protection laws allow and prohibit to examine the origins of public concern about privacy; the forces promoting or opposing privacy codes; the roles of media, grassroots activists and elite intervention; and a host of other considerations shaping the present state of privacy protection in each country.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 2: The United States

Priscilla M. Regan


Priscilla M. Regan In 1989, a young California actress, Rebecca Shaeffer, was stalked and shot to death by an obsessed fan who obtained her home address from the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). The death of this celebrity drew media attention to the problem of stalking and to the myriad databases of personal information that could be used to find someone. In this case, the focus of attention turned to drivers’ license records, maintained by the 50 states and considered in most states to be a public record database that could be accessed for a fee. In 1994 Congress passed the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act (DPPA) to restrict access to such information including name, address, telephone number, photograph, and medical or disability information. The DPPA was introduced in the Senate by Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and in the House by Jim Moran (DVA) both of whom had constituents who had been victims of releases of information from state DMVs. Direct marketers, private investigators and the media all lobbied against the DPPA. As soon as the law became effective in September 1997, the state of South Carolina sued claiming that the law violated the Tenth Amendment which states that powers not delegated to Congress are reserved to the states. A federal district court in South Carolina agreed and enjoined enforcement of the DPPA in South Carolina stating that ‘the states have been, and remain, the sovereigns responsible for maintaining motor-vehicle records, and these records constitute property of the states’. The Court...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.