arbiter
JournalsAccount

Fairness in market instrumental data law

Tommaso Fia

International Journal of Law and Information Technology2025https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/eaaf012article
ABDC A
Weight
0.37

Abstract

The paper examines fairness as a core principle of market instrumental data law. First, by drawing a comparison with the legal conceptions of fairness in data protection law and platform law, the nature and functions of fairness as a principle of market instrumental data law are unveiled. At bottom, fairness embodies a principle of interpersonal justice, distributive justice, and procedural justice (to a much lesser degree). The paper then scrutinises the contending normative readings of fairness that variously emerge from market instrumental data law. Four perspectives arise: the welfarist approach, the liberal perfectionist one, the political liberal one, and fairness as ‘equality of means and outcomes’. It is concluded that the interpretive and adjudicative practices in market instrumental data law have the potential to reflect this wealth of understandings, paving the way towards diverse patterns of data access and use in data markets.

1 citation

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/eaaf012

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{tommaso2025,
  title        = {{Fairness in market instrumental data law}},
  author       = {Tommaso Fia},
  journal      = {International Journal of Law and Information Technology},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/eaaf012},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Fairness in market instrumental data law

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.37

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06
M · momentum0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.