WordPress + Bootstrap

Since announcing the new podcast a couple of weeks ago, our inbox has been filled with slavering fans demanding their audio fix.

We’re pleased to announce that the first episode, on the new online safety regime, will be launching next week!

And while the anticipation mounts, our new trailer gives a taste of what’s to come. Make sure to watch with the sound on!

[evp_embed_video url=”https://panopticonblog.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2023/11/3_POD-PRORES-422-HQ-MEDIUM-RESOLUTION-Small.mov”]

We are excited to announce: Panopticon is proliferating! You will now be able to get your Panopticon fix on three different platforms.

X/Twitter
Follow us at @11KBWpanopticon to stay up to date on the latest developments in info, tech and media law and to get instant reaction and analysis from the team.

11KBW Panopticon Podcast
Keep your ears peeled wherever you get your podcasts. Our debut episode will be available shortly, and features Anya Proops KC telling me (Leo Davidson) all about the new Online Safety Act 2023. Future episodes will cover a diverse range of topics in info, tech and media law.

Revamped blog
You may have noticed that the blog is getting a revamp. We hope this will improve your experience and make reading updates on info, tech and media law even more enjoyable than it already is (scientists now believe this is possible).

If you have any feedback on anything we’re doing (or not doing!), let us know at panopticon@11kbw.com.

Our increasingly Internet-centric lives create many possibilities for digital interaction and intrusion, which may be thrilling or troubling depending on one’s perspective.

Facial recognition technology is a particularly stark instance of those possibilities, and of the risks and benefits associated with them. There has been significant public debate concerning facial recognition technology in the UK. In some other countries, notably China, the technology is already in widespread use, and provides a simple, efficient and effective vector for biometric identification by the state and the private sector alike. The potential unlocked by a biometric identification vector which operates on faces (the primary means of direct human interaction with the physical world), for security purposes, targeted advertising, and much else besides, is obvious. The privacy and anonymity implications, and the risks of over-use of such technology, are also obvious. Continue reading →

The First-tier Tribunal has given judgment in Clearview AI Inc v The Information Commissioner [2023] UKFTT 00819 (GRC).

The case concerned an enforcement notice and a £7.5 million Penalty Notice issued by the Commissioner to Clearview AI, an American facial recognition company, in May 2022. The Tribunal found that the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to issue either notice, on the basis that the GDPR/UK GDPR did not apply to the processing in issue. Accordingly, the Tribunal overturned both notices.
 

A more detailed case report will follow on Panopticon. In the meantime, the judgment can be found here.

Anya Proops KC, Christopher Knight and I acted for Clearview AI, instructed by Jenner and Block London LLP.

Timothy Pitt-Payne KC and Jamie Susskind acted for the Information Commissioner, instructed by the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Raphael Hogarth

“Grabbing his ballistic body armour, Diemaco C8 assault rifle and Glock 9mm pistol, and with a balaclava pulled over his head to protect his identity, the soldier swept into the area where the firefight was going on, engaged the enemy and led several civilians to safety outside.”

In January 2019, five terrorists launched a major attack at a hotel complex in Nairobi, Kenya, killing at least 21 people. A then fully-badged SAS soldier, who goes by the pseudonym “Christian Craighead”, intervened, assisting the Kenyan authorities, and later earned an award for his conspicuous gallantry. Mr Craighead wishes to tell his story.

He wrote a book, which he wants to publish, providing “an insider’s account of how a young man with a difficult upbringing served his country and saved lives during the Incident”. He is bound, however, by a confidentiality contract providing that unless he obtains ‘express prior authority in writing’ (“EPAW”) he would not disclose any information about the work of the UK Special Forces. The Ministry of Defence refused EPAW on the basis of its assessment that the material in the book is covered by the confidentiality contract and its publication would cause damage to national security. Continue reading →