Privacy in Social Media

This paper examines the contrast between United States and European Union laws concerning social media users’ right to remove their online presence permanently. Currently, the United States and European Union represent two distinct approaches to the right of individuals to permanently remove personal content from social media. U.S. law favors social media companies keeping profile content within the digital sphere even when that person no longer wants it there. The European Union’s approach social media privacy gives users more rights to remove themselves entirely from social media permanently (General Data Protection Regulation, Article 17, 2012). Using Myres McDougal’s (1959) legal theory of international laws’ effect on national policy, this legal study examines the social media privacy laws of the United States and European Union concerning user control of personal content. From this analysis, future implications of this international conflict, specifically the legal delineation of public and private spheres in the 21st Century, are suggested.

This paper researched two issues; targeted advertising and politics in social media. In its findings, it was apparent that many social media platforms actively collected user data and used big data to store and analyze it so as to profile the users. From these profiles, targeted adverts were served to the users on their social media feeds. The data collection process was however found to be unethical and full of privacy intrusions. Concerning politics, it was found out that social media had been used as a political tool. There were findings that most users were annoyed with political posts being shown on their feeds. The culprits were found to be the algorithms behind social media feeds and suggestions and the users themselves. The paper gave recommendations said to be temporary solutions for the issues surrounding target advertising and politics in social media.

In the contemporary social landscape, the widespread use of social media, such as platforms like TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube, has become a prominent trend in various circles of society, especially in Indonesia. As the number of users on these platforms increases, concerns regarding user security and privacy also increase. Data breaches in 2021 affecting 235 million users on Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube underscored the importance of researching the multifaceted dynamics around privacy concerns, levels of trust, risk awareness, and user behavior patterns related to sharing personal information on social media platforms. This research aimed to address this critical issue by introducing a research model developed based on relevant hypotheses from previous research. The sample used in this research consisted of social media users in Indonesia. Methodologically, this research used sophisticated structural equation modeling (SEM) tools for hypothesis testing and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to validate the efficacy of existing research models. These findings indicated that users’ trust, awareness, privacy concerns, and behavioral intentions significantly and positively influence the tendency to share personal data on social media platforms. This research provides valuable insights into the complex interactions between factors influencing user behavior in social media privacy, thereby offering implications for academia and practical applications.

In this paper, the concept of security and privacy in social media, or social networking will be discussed. First, a brief history and the concept of social networking will be introduced. Many of the security risks associated with using social media are presented. Also, the issue of privacy and how it relates to security are described. Based on these discussions, some solutions to improve a user’s privacy and security on social networks will be suggested. Our research will help the readers to understand the security and privacy issues for the social network users, and some steps which can be taken by both users and social network organizations to help improve security and privacy.

Due to lack of mature techniques in privacy-preserving information retrieval (IR), concerns about information privacy and security have become serious obstacles that prevent valuable user data to be used in IR research such as studies on query logs, social media, and medical record retrieval. In SIGIR 2014 and SIGIR 2015, we have run the privacy-preserving IR workshops exploring and understanding the privacy and security risks in information retrieval. This year, we continue the efforts of connecting the two disciplines of IR and privacy/security by organizing this workshop. We target on three themes, differential privacy and IR dataset release, privacy in search and browsing, and privacy in social media. The workshop includes panels with researchers from both fields on these three themes, as well as invite industry speakers for real-world challenges. The goals of this workshop include (1) bringing together the two research fields, and (2) yielding fruitful collaborations.

The article draws attention to the specifics of protection of intellectual property rights in Ukraine by civil and special legislation, the rules of which are designed to protect the subjective rights of right holders and other participants in legal relations in the field of intellectual property. Some aspects of the legal nature of jurisdictional remedies are studied. Attention is paid to the specifics of protection of intellectual property rights by civil law, which consists primarily in the methods of protection provided by procedural law. The legislation, the norms of which guarantee the protection of intellectual property and the ways of protection of civil rights are outlined. The existing in the legal literature different views on the classification of methods of protection of property rights are analyzed. The legal analysis of the application of the vindication claim as a means of protection of intellectual property rights is carried out and the given proposals are formulated..

The article examines the issue of the specifics of the protection of property rights, the specifics of their application to objects. Article 13 of the Constitution of Ukraine declares that the fundamental principle of in the field of protection of property rights there is a provision that the state provides equal protection of all subjects of property rights. In recent years, the question of protection of property rights has gained important theoretical and practical importance. The analysis of modern judicial practice shows that there is no unified position of judicial bodies on the resolution of disputes related to the violation of property rights. Courts of general jurisdiction and commercial courts, when considering disputes related to the protection of violated rights, ambiguously apply the norms of current legislation, therefore, the uncertainty of judicial authorities in the matter of the uniform application of the provisions of civil law to disputes of this category leads to the violation of the constitutional rights of owners. It is emphasized that the protection of property rights is a complex of civil legal means, which are aimed, on the one hand, at ensuring the normal economic use of property and maintaining property rights in an intact state, and, on the other hand, at restoring violated property relations, overcoming obstacles to their normal functioning and compensation for damages caused to the owner. As a conclusion, it is said that the protection of property rights acts as an independent subjective right that arises at the moment when there is a threat of its violation or dispute. This right includes powers, each of which involves the active implementation of positive actions. In the field of legal relations related to the protection of property rights, the objects of protection are directly the rights to certain objects. It is these rights that can be violated by other persons, and it is for their protection that the civil law provides for various means that a person can use to protect his violated or disputed rights, which are subject to protection by the law of interests. Subjects of legal relations related to the protection of property rights are, on the one hand, persons who have property rights to a specific object, and persons who retain property in accordance with relevant contracts or laws, and who, accordingly to legal norms, have the right to demand protection of their violated subjective rights. On the other hand, these are persons whose actions led to the unlawful violation of subjective rights to property objects.

The article focuses on presenting key issues revealed in the context of the standard of protection of property rights of owners of residential premises in a contemporary democratic state governed by the rule of law. The considerations presented take into account the perspective of Polish constitutional law and the guarantees of protection of ownership and other property rights as regulated in the Constitution of the Republic of Poland of April 2, 1997 (with particular emphasis on Article 21 and Article 64). The issue addressed in this paper of particular importance from the Polish perspective because, on the one hand, Polish constitutional law formulates relatively broad guarantees for the protection of ownership and other property rights (including those rights of owners of residential premises and tenants – as outlined in Article 21 and Article 64 of the Polish Constitution). On the other hand, there are several practical problems in Poland in this context, including a very significant systemic issue related to the lack of any systemic solutions in the regulation of the short-term rental market by the Polish legislator.

With the continuous development of the private economy and the growing prominence of its social role, the amendments to the Criminal Law (Amendment XII) aimed at strengthening the equal and fair protection of property rights in private enterprises. Taking the crime of illegal business operations as an example, it emphasizes the differentiated and equal protection of property rights in private enterprises under criminal law. It clarifies the differences in the nature of offenses between state-owned enterprise directors, supervisors, and senior management personnel and those in private enterprises. The former is more focused on the attributes of public duty crimes, while the latter more prominently exhibits characteristics of breach of trust crimes. In judicial practice, based on the protection of business-related property rights, a substantive approach should be adopted to reasonably define the scope of “directors, supervisors, and senior management,” including the identification of de facto directors, shadow directors, and senior management. This not only adheres to the principle of restraint in criminal law but also upholds the principle of legality in criminal law.

The Legacy of the SADC Tribunal in International Investment Law

While there have been numerous papers analyzing the political, economic and social effects of trust, there is little evidence on how social trust has an impact on property rights protection which is fundamental for promoting economic development. This study aims to investigate how trust value is related to property rights protection, focusing on the comparison of the effect on intellectual property rights versus physical property rights. Analyzing the data on property rights protection in 2015 from the Property Right Alliance organization and trust value from the World Value Survey from 1999 to 2014, we find that social trust has a direct effect only on intellectual property rights protection but less consistent on physical property rights protection. However, trust value has indirect effect on both forms of property rights protection via formal institutions. Our study, thus, adds to the literature by clarifying the context through which trust value affects cheating behaviors.

The article aims to analyze the legal norms that regulate the protection of the property right in the legal system of the Republic of Macedonia. In most cases, the protection of property right is realized through suits; however, our legal system provides for the possibility that the protection of property right can also be realized through the registration of immovable property rights in the respective Public Registries. Given the fact that in the Republic of North Macedonia the normative regulation of property suits is not contained in a single normative act, but rather extends to several such acts, the article, based on the practice of the high courts, seeks to analyze the legal cases related to property rights that qualify as rights similar to property rights, but which enjoy legal protection provided by law. The article will mainly elaborate on the basic provisions on property protection suits contained in the Law on Ownership and other Real Rights (2001). However, in this context, the provisions on property protection that are contained in the Law on Real Estate Cadastre (2008), the Law on Contentious Procedure (2005), the Law on Securing of Claims (2007), the Law on Construction Land (2008), etc., will also be taken into consideration.

It is indicated that the domestic legislator calls the task of civil proceedings the achievement of fairness in the trial, which should lead to effective protection of a violated, disputed or unrecognized right (including property rights) or interest in its broad sense. The article examines the issue of ensuring proper and effective conduct of pre-trial proceedings in civil cases related to the protection of property rights. At the same time, certain features of preparation for the judicial consideration of disputes in this category are highlighted. The legal conclusions of the Supreme Court are provided, which serve as a basis for the implementation of uniform judicial practice. Special attention is paid to the importance of correctly identifying defendants, the subject matter, and the grounds of the dispute in order to effectively protect the rights of owners – the subjects of these legal relations. The necessity of determining, at this stage of civil proceedings, the circumstances to be established, clarifying objections to claims, and collecting evidence that will be examined during the substantive consideration of the case is also emphasized. An essential component of the pre-trial stage in cases concerning the protection of property rights is the holding of a preparatory hearing, during which motions and applications of the parties and other organizational issues are resolved. If conducted properly, it can create conditions for dispute resolution through negotiations and conciliation procedures, and in the absence of a compromise – ensure the substantive consideration of the dispute in the shortest possible time. In addition, when considering each case, it is necessary to strive for the fairness of judicial proceedings, which should lead to the effective protection of a violated, disputed, or unrecognized right (in particular, the right of ownership). This means that a properly conducted pre-trial proceeding in cases regarding the protection of property rights is an important algorithm through which the main task of civil proceedings is achieved – the protection of violated, unrecognized, or disputed rights, freedoms, or interests through fair, impartial, and timely consideration and resolution of the case.

Prospects of the improvement of property rights protection in Russia are analyzed in the article through the prism of the economics of property rights. The level of independency of judiciary as a factor of property rights protection, and influence of the level of competition on the political market on judicial independency are stressed. Basing on the positive dynamics in Russia of the share of fiscal revenue that is not connected with value creation, the conclusion is drawn that there are great obstacles for improving the situation with property rights protection.

The beginning of Russia’s armed aggression against Ukraine and its actual consequences in 2014-2015 forced hundreds of thousands of residents of the temporarily annexed and occupied territories to leave their place of residence. The need for proper provision and protection of their rights - taking into account the situation in which they found themselves - led to the introduction of the category “internally displaced person” into the system of Ukrainian legislation, which expresses the peculiarities of the position of these persons and their participation in legal relations, including in property`s relations. The development of this interdisciplinary legal sub-institute has an impact on the theoretical understanding of the forms of protection of property rights of individuals. The need for a thorough study of the changes brought by the amendments to the legislation and, especially, a full scale military invasion in 2022 determine the relevance of this article. The purpose of the article is to study the novelties of Ukrainian legislation on the protection of the property rights of internally displaced persons and their impact on the understanding of jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional forms, as well as ways of protecting the property rights of internally displaced persons. Based on the research materials, it was determined that the legislation proposed special measures to protect the property rights of IDPs (temporary free residence, acquisition of the right to a plot of land from state-owned lands, obtaining a real estate loan on preferential terms and others) can be considered as ways of protecting the property rights of IDPs in their relationship with each other and in connection with other rights of these persons. The development of the theory of forms and methods of protection of civil rights takes place mainly in special methods of protection of property rights (of jurisdictional form), which consist of: 1) in measures to protect movable property; 2) in the provision of benefits and compensations for IDPs in connection with the loss of the ability to use and dispose of their property; 3) in creating exceptions from legal regimes that take into account the specifics of the actual situation of IDPs; 4) in the provision of special powers of authorities aimed at protecting the property rights of IDPs.