Pritesh writes: Indian government never thought that its indifference towards privacy laws, data security laws and data protection laws would become its headache. With controversies like illegal phone tapping, imposition of Aadhar project, launch of projects like national intelligence grid (Natgrid) and crime and criminal tracking network and systems (CCTNS) without any procedural safeguards, etc…
Category: Laws
PIPEDA Review II: Private Right of Action?
Michael Power comments on the UK’s Protection of Freedoms proposal as a comparison framework for discussing what else might be usefully included in Canadian protections: […] If the UK wants to enable citizens to directly protect their privacy where CCTV is concerned — by making an application for judicial review — why shouldn’t we do…
In Response to EPIC, Justice Department Offers No Public Justification for Data Retention
From EPIC.org: In response to an EPIC Freedom of Information Act request, the Department of Justice sent back only heavily redacted documents with no justification for data retention legislation. EPIC filed the request in 2010, seeking the Department’s views on he Internet SAFETY Act, which would require internet service providers to retain user records for at least two…
Chris Hoofnagle’s comments on preliminary FTC report on protecting consumer privacy
Chris has posted his comments on Berkeley’s site. One of the more interesting sections of his comments (to me, anyway) was his response to how the FTC frames American consumers’ attitudes toward privacy. Here are some snippets from his thoughtful commentary: On page ii, the Staff Report adopts the frame of consumer attitudes towards privacy…