Machine summary:
(2000) (unpublished working paper, on file with the Stanford Law Review) (arguing for an efficient market in personal data on the Interet as a means of protecting privacy); Jerry Kang, Information Privacy in Cyberspace Transactions, 50 STAN.
For detailed analysis of the European Directive, see Paul Schwartz & Joel Reidenberg, Data Privacy Law: A Study Of United States Data Protection (1996); Paul M.
Schwartz, Privacy and Participation: Personal Information and Public Sector Regulation in the United States, 80 IOWA L.
Applying Property and Contract Rules to Commercial Transactions in Data in Internet Commerce (2000) (working paper, on file with the Stanford Law Review) (suggesting intellectual property rights in data as a possibility, but noting some potential limitations on such a right); Developments in the Law-The Law of Cyberspace, 112 HARV.
L. Rev. Vs 8 (arguing that intellectual property law is a poor fit for protecting privacy); Samuelson, supra note 4 (arguing for a licensing approach to protecting personal privacy data).
L. Rev. 51 (1997) (arguing for database protection based on either principles of unfair competition or intellectual property regimes rather than exclusive property rights).
(forthcoming 2000) (arguing that the Intellectual Property Clause and the First Amendment present barriers to Congress' assigning private rights to information); Yochai Benkler, Free as the Air to Common Use: First Amendment Constraints on Enclosure of the Public Domain, 74 N.
S. 207, 228 (1990) (holding that the Copyright Act balances an individual's and the public's rights to creative works); Bonito Boats, Inc. v.