You may like to note that, as predicted in my previous post on this subject, Trump has just signed off on the repeal of privacy protections for internet users – see here.
Anya Proops QC
Trumping E-Privacy Legislation
For those of you who can drag yourselves away from the relentless coverage of the formal commencement of Brexit, it is worth noting that the US House of Representatives yesterday voted by a slim majority (215 to 205) to block legislation enacted under President Obama which was designed to give consumers more control over how internet service providers share their data. The legislation in question effectively made the sharing of data by internet service providers conditional on user consent. The order blocking the legislation will now be sent to President Trump for ratification, which will no doubt be swiftly forthcoming. Continue reading
The practicalities of the GDPR: breach notification, consent
As the GDPR hurtles towards us, our picture of how it will play out in practice gradually becomes clearer, aided by case studies of practices elsewhere, and guidance from regulators such as the ICO. Here are some observations on two important aspects of life under the GDPR. Continue reading
Vexatious Requests and the EIR: Case Closed?
Anyone remember Craven v Information Commissioner & DECC? The EIR vexatious request case heard with Dransfield? Court of Appeal decision back in mid-2015? Well, word reaches us at Panopticon that the Supreme Court has just issued an Order refusing Mrs Craven permission to appeal. Continue reading
Yet another subject access judgment…
So, as the saying goes, you wait months for a subject access judgment, and then three come along at once. First it was Holyoake v CPC & Christian Candy (see Julian Milford’s post here); then it was Dawson-Damer v Taylor Wessing (see Chris Knight’s post here) and now, drum-roll, we have the joined appeals of Ittihadieh v 5-11 Cheyne Gardens & Ors and Deer v Oxford University [2017] EWCA Civ 121.
As ever with these cases, the facts are somewhat less than scintillating. Briefly:
Section 32 DPA: Resistance not Futile
We have banged the drum on Panopticon to almost Phil Collins-like levels on theme of the growing utility of the Data Protection Act to media lawyers, but it would be foolish to pretend it can always produce an answer from nowhere in a traditional journalism context. The judgment in ZXC v Bloomberg LP [2017] EWHC 328 (QB) reminds us of that. Continue reading