Metadata, traffic data, communications data, service use information… What is the difference? Does the difference matter? An interdisciplinary view from the UK
Metadata, traffic data, communications data, service use information… What is the difference? Does the difference matter? An interdisciplinary view from the UK
In the wake of the Snowden revelations, it has become standard practice to rely upon the dichotomies metadata/data or metadata/content of communications to delineate the remit of the surveillance and investigation power of law enforcement agencies as well as the range of data retention obligations imposed upon telecommunications operators and in particular Internet service providers (ISPs). There is however no consensual definition of what metadata is and different routes can be taken to describe what metadata really covers. The key question is whether or to which extent metadata should be treated akin to content data for the purposes of identifying the categories of data which shall actually be retained by telecommunications operators and to which law enforcement agencies can have access. In an attempt to answer the question, this paper provides an understanding of what metadata is and what their diversity is by following two steps. First, adopting an interdisciplinary approach, we argue that three types of metadata should be distinguished in relation to the nature of the activity of the service provider processing them and their level in a network communications - network-level, application-level metadata, and service-use metadata - and we identify three types of criteria to classify these metadata and determine whether they should be deemed as akin to content data. Second, we compare these categories with legal concepts and in particular UK legal concepts to assess to which extent law-makers have managed to treat content data and metadata differently
978-94-017-7376-8
Stalla-Bourdillon, Sophie
c189651b-9ed3-49f6-bf37-25a47c487164
Papadaki, Evangelia
bbc1d862-d460-415d-9edd-dbe40927ceea
Chown, Tim
ec204b89-ace4-4cba-94a9-38e7649e9dee
2016
Stalla-Bourdillon, Sophie
c189651b-9ed3-49f6-bf37-25a47c487164
Papadaki, Evangelia
bbc1d862-d460-415d-9edd-dbe40927ceea
Chown, Tim
ec204b89-ace4-4cba-94a9-38e7649e9dee
Stalla-Bourdillon, Sophie, Papadaki, Evangelia and Chown, Tim
(2016)
Metadata, traffic data, communications data, service use information… What is the difference? Does the difference matter? An interdisciplinary view from the UK.
In,
Gutwirth, Serge, Leenes, Ronald and De Hert, Paul
(eds.)
Data Protection on the Move: Current Developments in ICT and Privacy/Data Protection.
Springer.
(doi:10.1007/978-94-017-7376-8_16).
Record type:
Book Section
Abstract
In the wake of the Snowden revelations, it has become standard practice to rely upon the dichotomies metadata/data or metadata/content of communications to delineate the remit of the surveillance and investigation power of law enforcement agencies as well as the range of data retention obligations imposed upon telecommunications operators and in particular Internet service providers (ISPs). There is however no consensual definition of what metadata is and different routes can be taken to describe what metadata really covers. The key question is whether or to which extent metadata should be treated akin to content data for the purposes of identifying the categories of data which shall actually be retained by telecommunications operators and to which law enforcement agencies can have access. In an attempt to answer the question, this paper provides an understanding of what metadata is and what their diversity is by following two steps. First, adopting an interdisciplinary approach, we argue that three types of metadata should be distinguished in relation to the nature of the activity of the service provider processing them and their level in a network communications - network-level, application-level metadata, and service-use metadata - and we identify three types of criteria to classify these metadata and determine whether they should be deemed as akin to content data. Second, we compare these categories with legal concepts and in particular UK legal concepts to assess to which extent law-makers have managed to treat content data and metadata differently
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 2015
Published date: 2016
Organisations:
Faculty of Business, Law and Art
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 378588
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/378588
ISBN: 978-94-017-7376-8
PURE UUID: 8c4d9ac0-2149-47cf-892b-e70c0765e36d
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 20 Jul 2015 10:33
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 03:37
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Evangelia Papadaki
Author:
Tim Chown
Editor:
Serge Gutwirth
Editor:
Ronald Leenes
Editor:
Paul De Hert
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics