March 31, 2014
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 »
March 29, 2014
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 »
March 28, 2014
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:
The Australian Law Reform Commission last night offered up a sneak preview of recommendations it will make around new privacy law, which will include a ‘safe harbour’ provision for internet platform providers such as Facebook and Google.
In June last year then-Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus asked the ALRC to inquire into the possibility of a new statute that would apply to serious invasions of privacy conducted by individuals and organisations (as opposed to the existing Privacy Act which is focused on data protection and applies to organisations with a turnover exceeding $3 million only).
Unlike many European countries and the US, Australia has never offered an explicit legal protection to its citizens against gross invasions of privacy.
On Monday, the ALRC will 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:
Since its adoption in 2000, Safe Harbour has become a vehicle for EU-US flows of personal data. The importance of efficient protection in case of transfers of personal data has Read the rest of this entry »
March 27, 2014
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:
Chairman Rockefeller, Ranking Member Thune, and members of the Committee, I am Edith Ramirez, Chairwoman of the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC” or “Commission”). I appreciate the opportunity to present the Commission’s testimony on data security.
Under your leadership, Chairman Rockefeller, this Committee has led critical efforts in Congress to protect consumers’ privacy and data security. Throughout your tenure, the Committee has focused on a wide range of privacy and security concerns facing consumers in this increasingly interconnected economy. From the recent examination of the data broker industry and its impact on consumers;2 to protecting our children’s privacy as technology changes; to promoting consumers’ choices about online privacy; to proposing baseline data security requirements for industry, you and members of the Committee have shared the same goals as the Federal Trade Commission: to protect consumer privacy and promote data security in the private sector. The FTC thanks you for your leadership.
As this Committee is well aware, consumers’ data is at risk. Recent publicly announced data breaches remind us that hackers and others seek to exploit Read the rest of this entry »
March 26, 2014
The world today reports, in Obama says it will take time to regain trust after spying revelations, on the call by the US President to reform the collection of data by government. Which may have receptive ears in the legislative branch (see here). The executive has slowly been turning its attention to the collection of metadata. Very slowly. Last Friday the President met with tech CEOs on privacy issues (see here)
The report provides:
ELEANOR HALL: The US president Barack Obama has declared that he is determined to win back the trust of citizens who are disgusted by revelations of America’s spying activities.
He urged Congress Read the rest of this entry »
March 25, 2014
In the last sitting week of the last Parliament the Privacy Amendment (Privacy Alerts) Bill 2013 was awaiting debate and passage by the Senate. It had been introduced into and passed the House of Representatives with any controversy. It had bi partisan support. There was bi partisan support in the Senate if some grumbling at the Committee stage (mainly because of the lack of time in considering the Bill). On track to becoming law. Then came a certain K Rudd who challenged the incumbent Prime Minister, and won. The Senate timetable is thrown into confusion and the Bill lies there unloved and unpassed. When Parliament was prorogued it lapsed.
On 20 March 2014 Senator Singh of Tasmania has introduced the 2014 version of the 2013 Bill. They are identical. While the Bill is not Read the rest of this entry »
In Pro Publica the author Julia Angwin writes about the privacy intrusive practice of tracking via apps, tablets and smart phones in Privacy Tools: Mask Your Location. The use of metadata generally and of locational data in particular has, as the article points out, a high probability to identify individuals.
It provides:
“Where R U?” There’s a reason that is among the most common text messages of the modern age.