Peter A Clarke

In 2009 the newly minted President of the United States, President Obama, spoke to some school children and cautioned them about what they put on Facebook.  It is reported by the Huffington Post in Obama On Facebook: “Be Careful What You Post”.

At that time  he said:

“Whatever you do,” he told them, “it will be pulled up later in your life.”

Prescient comments then and  equally applicable today, if not more so with Big Data and sophisticated algorithims. Advice that is not heeded by those who take selfies after sex, as reported in Why are couples taking #aftersex selfies? A spectacularly stupid practice at any age.

In the Age’s article Online: Parents urged to be careful with child-related information the issue covered relates to Read the rest of this entry »

Ars Technica reports in Philips Smart TVs wide open to Gmail cookie theft, other serious hacks regarding serious security flaws that could allow hackers to  steal information from attached USB sticks and pilfer authentication cookies which could give them access to Read the rest of this entry »

The collection of metadata is a growing area of concern for privacy practitioners, advocates and regulators.  Big data, with every more powerful computing power and more sophisticated algorithims, have Read the rest of this entry »

The Australian Law Reform Commission (the “ALRC”) has released its long awaited discussion paper on Serious Invasions of Privacy in the Digital Era (found here).

Submissions are due by no later than 12 May 2014.  That is a very short time frame given the size of the report, over 200 pages, and 47 recommendations.

The media release provides:

The Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) today released a Discussion Paper, Serious Invasions of Privacy in the Digital Era (DP 80, 2014). The Terms of Reference for this Inquiry ask the ALRC to consider the detailed legal design of a statutory cause of action and, in addition, other innovative ways the law might prevent or redress serious invasions of privacy.

The ALRC is Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook and privacy may not be antonyms as such but they often end up in separate camps. Slate in Facebook’s Privacy Dinosaur Wants to Make Sure You’re Not Oversharing reports on the curious development of Facebook is developing a privacy check up to avoid over sharing of personal information. As the article makes clear the motivations are not clear.  The high road explanation is Read the rest of this entry »

Privacy law of civil jurisdictions, such as Germany and France, are quite separate and distinct from their common law cousins, the USA, Canada, New Zealand and United Kingdom.  The US and New Zealand has a stand alone privacy tort, Canada is moving in that direction and the UK’s case law still pays lip service to equitable underpinnings in its misuse of private information actions but is becoming ever so much a tort in all but name.  But the defences and the weighing exercise in the common law stand in stark contra Read the rest of this entry »

Last night Professor McDonald gave the first lecture of the 2014 Distinguished Speakers program at the Sydney Law School.  Her topic, not surprisingly, was on the inquiry by the ALRC on Serious Invasions of Privacy.

The Discussion Paper, running to 204 pages and containing 47 recommendations, will be released on Monday 31 March 2014.

Itnews gave it detailed coverage in ‘Safe harbour’ for Facebook, Google proposed for Aus privacy law.

It provides:

Itnews reports on a drone v helicopter near miss in Drone almost collides with Westpac Rescue chopper.   It is hardly an unexpected event.  The expansion in the use of drones by properly trained and accredited operators and the hobbyists, the limited enforcement of regulations is making for a complicated situation in the airwaves.  The lack of privacy protection is a significant issue both in Australia (where protections are weak and have been traditionally enforced sporadically) and the United States of America, where the legislative response has been focused at a state level.

It provides:

UAV aimed for helicopter.

One of two Bell 412 choppers the Westpac Rescue Helicopter Service operates was involved in a near miss with the UAV near Read the rest of this entry »

The Safe Harbour arrangements, in place since 2000, in the United States of America (the “USA”) regarding transfer of personal data from the European Union to the USA has been an imperfect vehicle for ensuring some form of compatibility in the processing of personal information, data protection and free movement of data by US organisations to a standard consistent with the EU Directive 95/46EC.    In November the European Commission issued quite a critical report on the functioning of the Safe Harbour arrangements.  It is found here.  It is, for practitioners in the privacy field, a very useful and informative document.  The conclusions and recommendations are:

Yesterday the Federal Trade Commission (the FTC) testified to the US Senate Committe on Commerce, Science and Transportation regarding cyber security and data breaches.  It is a very useful oversight of what the FTC does, how it approaches regulation and what results it has achieved.

The FTC called for more comprehensive data protection regulation and mandatory data breach notification laws at a Federal level.  Most states in the USA have some form of data breach notification legislation. Australia has no such requirement at either State or Federal level.

The FTC’s statement is found here and it provides, absent footnotes: