By: Kimberly A. Houser[*] and W. Gregory Voss[**]
Much has been written about the difference in the privacy laws of the European Union and the United States and ideologies behind the two regimes. One risk of the increasing divergence in views on privacy is the potential halting of data transfers from the European Union to the United States by the European Commission (EC). As data is a significant driver of the world economy, special care must be taken both to ensure that data is able to cross borders easily, and individuals’ rights to data protection are respected.
The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) prohibits the transfer of personal data outside of the European Economic Area (EEA) to countries without “adequate” privacy protections. As the United States is considered to have insufficient protections, the EC requires that an approved mechanism, such as the Privacy Shield—its agreement with the United States that permits U.S. companies to self-certify that they will meet certain minimum privacy protections—be used for such transfers. Alternative mechanisms include standard contractual clauses (SCCs). Suspension of any one approved mechanism may call into question the legitimacy of the others.
Continue reading “The European Commission on the Privacy Shield: All Bark and No Bite?”
By: Navreet Kaur[+]
This article discusses the unprecedented rate at which data is growing and the various possibilities of privacy infringements. It views the problem in the context of a developing nation, India, because India has formed a committee last year to devise and regulate regulations for data protection. The article also discusses the approaches adopted by various other countries so that India can meet global standard when formulating policies for data protection. The features of the Data Protection Bill that the committee has recently submitted to the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, Government of India are also discussed.
Continue reading “Privacy Breaches and Big Data: Solutions and Suggestions in India’s Context”
By: Evisa Kambellari*
In the virtual world, one person can present himself in different identities and several persons can present themselves under the same virtual identity. Online impersonation can occur in two ways: either by stealing one’s personal information to gain access to his online profile or by creating a completely fake profile. The fake profile might reveal information that belongs to someone else or be totally fictitious. Such flexibility in assuming one’s identity online is due to the anonymity that people enjoy in the online world. Inability to elaborate proper identification tools of Internet users is one of the biggest challenges in preventing and prosecuting social media related crimes. Online social networking has reshaped human interaction in a way that reduces the barriers that would traditionally keep strangers apart. Identification requirements are minimal and there is no proper mechanism of verifying the truthfulness of the information one presents in creating an online profile or e-mail account. However, creating a fake online profile is not a criminal act per se. The component that turns the lawful act into an unlawful act of online impersonation is the imposter’s malicious intent to “defraud,” obtain a “benefit,” or “injure”.
Continue reading “ONLINE IMPERSONATION: I HAVE A RIGHT TO BE LEFT ALONE V. YOU CAN’T MANDATE HOW I USE MY PRIVACY TOOLBOX”