Data protection: three developments to watch

Panopticon likes data protection, and it likes to keep its eye on things. Here are three key developments in the evolution of data protection law which, in Panopticon’s eyes, are particularly worth watching. The right to be forgotten: battle lines drawn First, the major data protection development of 2014 was the CJEU’s ‘right to be […]

Campaigning journalism is still journalism: Global Witness and s.32 DPA

In an important development in the on-going saga of Steinmetz and others v Global Witness, the ICO has decided that the campaigning NGO is able to rely on the ‘journalism’ exemption under s.32 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA). The decision has major implications for journalists working both within and outside the mainstream media, […]

Information Rights: imminent developments

Like any self-respecting Panopticon, this website keeps tabs on imminent developments in its fields of interest. Here are some of the major cases to look out for in the information rights field. State surveillance and the Prism/Tempora programmes The obtaining, use and retention of personal data by state agencies has come under intense scrutiny since […]

Some results may have been removed under data protection law in Europe. Learn more.

This is the message that now regularly greets those using Google to search for information on named individuals. It relates, of course, to the CJEU’s troublesome Google Spain judgment of 13 May 2014. I certainly wish to learn more. So I take Google up on its educational offer and click through to its FAQ page, […]

GCHQ’s internet surveillance – privacy and free expression join forces

A year ago, I blogged about Privacy International’s legal challenge – alongside Liberty – against GCHQ, the Security Services and others concerning the Prism/Tempora programmes which came to public attention following Edward Snowden’s whistleblowing. That case is now before the Investigatory Powers Tribunal. It will be heard for 5 days, commencing on 14 July. Privacy […]

Victory for Spamalot – Niebel in the Upper Tribunal

The spamming industry is a decidedly irritating but sadly almost unavoidable feature of our networked world. There is no question but that spamming (i.e. the sending of unsolicited direct marketing electronic communications) constitutes an unlawful invasion of our privacy (see further regs 22-23 of the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations 2003 (SI 2003/2426) (PECR), implemented […]