Data Protection Law in Russia
In: Privacy in Germany: PinG ; Datenschutz und Compliance, Heft 2
ISSN: 2196-9817
1220810 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Privacy in Germany: PinG ; Datenschutz und Compliance, Heft 2
ISSN: 2196-9817
In: European data protection law review: EdpL, Band 5, Heft 4, S. 500-519
ISSN: 2364-284X
2008/2009 ; Privacy and data protection concern everyone and are issue of profound importance around the World. Privacy has been hailed as "an integral part of our humanity" the "hart of our liberty" and "the beginning of all freedoms" (Solove, 2008). Given its importance, privacy is recognized as a fundamental human right according to many International Instruments such as: the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 (Article 12), International Covenant on the Civil and Political Rights (Article 17) The European Convention of Human Rights of 1950 (Article 8), the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union of 2007 (Article 8) and the Treaty of Lisbon of 2008 (Article 16 of the TFEU). However, beyond this worldwide consensus about the importance of privacy and the need for its protection, there is difficulty to conceptualize the privacy. Privacy is a contested legal concept, with several understandings and more misunderstandings. Privacy is actually shorthand for a complex bundle of issues, ranging from dignity to discrimination, and rooted in our need to control what we tell others about ourselves. The main difficulty to reach a satisfying conceptualization of the privacy is that there are some eternal privacy tensions, namely, the interests protected by privacy and data protection laws are inherently in conflict with other legitimate interests such as the freedom of speech, public security and the free flow of information. While, it is impossible to belong to a community and withhold all data, the collection and the processing of our data carry with it many risks and dangers. One such risk is that the data will be abused by those who access it, either by authorization or not. Data which was consensually provided for one purpose might be used against us in a different context. Other privacy tensions are driven by technology which gave rise to the emergence of the data protection law: the falling cost of data storage and communication makes it easier for merchants and governments to collect more data on people and thus to become more efficient to violate the privacy. The development of the Computer technology in the 1960's and 1970's and the enormous potential of the digital revolution made the civil libertarians worry. The nightmare of all-seeing, all-knowing "Big Brother" of George Orwell's "1984" did not belong anymore to the realm of the fiction, but was a reality. And as the enormous potential of the digital revolution became more apparent and together with it the dangers posed to privacy, so the calls for the specific measures to protect individuals became louder. The data protection rules originally developed, at national level in the 1970s, as a response to the threats posed to the privacy by the technological developments of the 1960s and 1970s. It emerged as a new legal field, separate from the privacy law but dependent upon it. The task of the personal data law is to provide a legal framework which is capable of reconciling the needs and interests of those who make use of personal data (data controllers or data processors) with those of persons to whom these data relate (data subjects). Europe has proven to be the leader in protecting privacy and personal data of the individuals in the digital age. At the EU level, the first legal instrument in this field was Data Protection Directive, which was passed in 1995 to harmonize national data protection laws within the European Community, with the aim of protecting the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals including their privacy and personal data. After 15 years the question is whether the Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC fit the objectives for which it was adopted in 1995. The European Commission considers that the Directive 95/46/EC fulfils its original objectives and therefore does not need to be amended. This thesis questions this static approach of the European Commission to the data protection regime and argues that the increasing pressure on privacy due to the development of privacy destroying technologies and the growing use of and demand for personal information by public and private sectors, requires quick legal answer and constant change of the data protection legislation. The research carried out for this thesis shows that, over time the social and regulatory environment surrounding the creation, management and the use of personal data has evolved significantly since the adoption of the Directive 95/46/EC. The Directive is showing its age and is failing to meet the new challenges posed to privacy by factors such as the huge growth of personal information on line and the growing availability and ability of the new technologies to process, use and abuse personal information in many ways. These factors have challenged the means and the methods used by Directive to protect personal data and have altered the environment for the implementation of the Directive. Thus, it is clear that the context in which the data protection Directive was created has been changed fundamentally and certain basic assumptions of the Directive have already been challenged in approach, in law and in practice. All these factors show that the Directive is out of touch to meet the technological, social and legal challenges of 21st century and therefore need to be reviewed and amended. ; XXI Ciclo ; 1975
BASE
In: Oxford data protection & privacy law
Offers a rich analysis of the meaning of 'data subjects' and 'vulnerability' within the context of the General Data Protection Regulation. It seeks to reconceptualise data subjects' vulnerability in the digital age and to promote a 'vulnerability-aware' interpretation of the GDPR.
In: Law, Governance and Technology Series v.20
This book on privacy and data protection offers readers conceptual analysis as well as thoughtful discussion of issues, practices, and solutions. It features results of the seventh annual International Conference on Computers, Privacy, and Data Protection, CPDP 2014, held in Brussels January 2014.The book first examines profiling, a persistent core issue of data protection and privacy. It covers the emergence of profiling technologies, on-line behavioral tracking, and the impact of profiling on fundamental rights and values. Next, the book looks at preventing privacy risks and harms through impact assessments. It contains discussions on the tools and methodologies for impact assessments as well as case studies.The book then goes on to cover the purported trade-off between privacy and security, ways to support privacy and data protection, and the controversial right to be forgotten, which offers individuals a means to oppose the often persistent digital memory of the web.Written during the process of the fundamental revision of the current EU data protection law by the Data Protection Package proposed by the European Commission, this interdisciplinary book presents both daring and prospective approaches. It will serve as an insightful resource for readers with an interest in privacy and data protection.
In: in Florian Martin-Bariteau & Teresa Scassa, eds., Artificial Intelligence and the Law in Canada (Toronto: LexisNexis Canada, 2021)
SSRN
Working paper
In: University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 4/2021
SSRN
Working paper
In: Nijhoff studies in EU law 3
In: University casebook series
In: The Cambridge yearbook of European legal studies: CYELS, Band 19, S. 252-286
ISSN: 2049-7636
AbstractEU data protection law has, to date, been monitored and enforced in a decentralised way by independent supervisory authorities in each Member State. While the independence of these supervisory authorities is an essential element of EU data protection law, this decentralised governance structure has led to competing claims from supervisory authorities regarding the national law applicable to a data processing operation and the national authority responsible for enforcing the data protection rules. These competing claims – evident in investigations conducted into the data protection compliance of Google and Facebook – jeopardise the objectives of the EU data protection regime. The new General Data Protection Regulation will revolutionise data protection governance by providing for a centralised decision-making body, the European Data Protection Board. While this agency will ensure the 'Europeanisation' of data protection law, given the nature and the extent of this Board's powers, it marks another significant shift in the EU's agency-creating process and must, therefore, also be considered in its broader EU context.
Our societies are becoming ever more digitised. The pace of technological developments and how personal data are being processed affects each of us every day and in all sorts of ways in the light of these changes. Legal frameworks of the European Union (EU) and the Council of Europe that safeguard the protection of privacy and personal data have recently been reviewed. Europe is at the forefront of data protection worldwide. The EU's data protection standards are based on Council of Europe Convention 108, EU instruments – including the General Data Protection Regulation and the Data Protection Directive for Police and Criminal Justice Authorities – as well as on the respective case law of the European Court of Human Rights and of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The data protection reforms carried out by the EU and the Council of Europe are extensive and at times complex, with wide-ranging benefits and impact on individuals and businesses. This handbook aims to raise awareness and improve knowledge of data protection rules, especially among non-specialist legal practitioners who have to deal with data protection issues in their work. The handbook has been prepared by the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), with the Council of Europe (together with the Registry of the European Court of Human Rights) and the European Data Protection Supervisor. It updates a 2014 edition and is part of a series of legal handbooks co-produced by FRA and the Council of Europe. We express our thanks to the data protection authorities of Belgium, Estonia, France, Georgia, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Monaco, Switzerland and the United Kingdom for their helpful feedback on the draft version of the handbook. In addition, we express our appreciation to the European Commission's Data Protection Unit and its International Data Flows and Protection Unit. We thank the Court of Justice of the European Union for the documentary support provided during the preparatory works of this handbook. ; European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights and Council of Europe
BASE
In: European data protection law review: EdpL, Band 9, Heft 3, S. 311-332
ISSN: 2364-284X