Government fragments data protection policy and leaves Leveson’s data protection recommendations to rot – Chris Pounder

30 09 2015

DCMSThe transfer of responsibility for data protection policy to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) from the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) is a really bad idea.  It fragments responsibility for data protection policy across three Departments of State and risks reducing the protection afforded to data subjects.  Important data protection recommendations from Leveson will be shelved.  This blog explains why. Read the rest of this entry »

Party promises on Data Protection, FOI, Digital rights, Human Rights, Leveson and mass surveillance – Chris Pounder

21 04 2015

?????????At great risk to my mental health, I have extracted the relevant parts of the Party Manifestos.  Here they are without comment. URLs for each manifesto is at the end; address of my psychiatrist available on request. Read the rest of this entry »

If Google remembers whom it has forgotten, has it complied with the ECJ Judgment? – Chris Pounder

4 06 2014

Google--007Google has received all kinds of plaudits for quickly introducing its “right to be forgotten” procedure; however from what I have read in the press, its procedure for the removal of URLs is not fit for purpose. In this blog, I explain why Google’s procedure appears to be so defective. Read the rest of this entry »

Press and Google misrepresent European Court’s Google judgement – Chris Pounder

1 06 2014

Google-logoA tsunami of misinformation has overwhelmed the ECJ’s ruling on Google: high-tech corporate America, NGOs and parts of the UK media are claiming that the judgement constitutes shocking defeat for the concept of freedom of expression. In support of this claim, these organisations are publishing statements that are simply not true. Read the rest of this entry »

Data Protection Code of Practice for the Press raises the prospect of enhanced protection for ordinary data subjects – Chris Pounder

22 02 2013

ico-logo-blue-grey-370x229Five days ago, the Conservatives outlined their plans for implementing the Leveson Recommendations (the Recommendations”) by creating an independent panel, established by Royal Charter, to verify that any new press regulator is effective. Yesterday, the Information Commissioner put a spanner in these works; he has published outline plans for his own voluntary Code of Practice and is consulting on its possible content. Read the rest of this entry »

The Duchess of Cambridge, the Hoax Telephone Call – was this a Data Protection Offence?

8 12 2012

The hoax telephone call to the King Edward VII Hospital in which two DJ’s blagged private information about the Duchess of Cambridge has become the main item on the news today after the apparent suicide of the nurse who was duped by the call. The Australian radio station, 2Day FM, whose DJs were responsible for the call told the “Daily Telegraph” that “it had not broken any laws“.  But, as pointed out by Dr Chris Pounder on the Hawktalk blog the position under the Data Protection Act 1998 (“DPA”) has not been considered. Read the rest of this entry »

Leveson Principles underpinned in 133 words of legislation: no need for an extensive law – Chris Pounder

3 12 2012

4Have you followed all the hand wringing by Government about the statutory underpinning of the Leveson Principles? Have you seen the press coverage equating statutory underpinning with state control?  Evidently the Government say there are pages and pages of legislation to draft in order to underpin, in law, an independent self-regulatory body for the Press. So in the spirit of “Jamie’s 15 Minute Meals” here is a statutory underpinning of the Leveson Principles in 133 words of law. Read the rest of this entry »

Leveson, Press and data protection: the Rubicon has already been crossed – Chris Pounder

30 11 2012

rubicon-sign-708104The Prime Minister, David Cameron, has expressed “serious concerns and misgivings” over bringing in laws to underpin any new body to regulate the press. Mr Cameron told MPs that legislation backing a regulatory body underpinned by statute would “cross the Rubicon” by writing elements of press regulation into the law for the “first time“. Because of this, Mr Cameron, is “not convinced at this stage that statute is necessary to achieve Lord Justice Leveson’s objectives”. Read the rest of this entry »