Wednesday, November 28, 2012

When is personal information on the Internet ‘manifestly made public’?

The Directive 95/46/EC in Article 8 regulates conditions related to the processing of special categories of data. In paragraph 1 the Directive says that “Member States shall prohibit the processing of personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, trade-union membership, and the processing of data concerning health or sex life.”[1] In the paragraph 2 the Directive presents exceptions from the rule in paragraph 1, therefore according to the section (a) the paragraph does not apply if “the data subject has given his explicit consent to the processing of those data” and (among others) also according to the section (e) if “the processing relates to data which are manifestly made public by the data subject.”[2] Therefore it could be assumed that all personal information online, which has been ‘manifestly made public’ by individuals themselves could be processed by other individuals or third parties. 


Monday, October 15, 2012

State’s access to individuals retained data


State’s access to individuals retained data is a very sensitive topic from a privacy rights perspective. In the beginning of October (2012) a proposal[1] to amend Article 166a (7) of the Electronic Communications Act was made in the Slovenian Parliament. This Act (among others) regulates the rights of electronic communication users and the protection of secrecy and confidentiality of electronic communications.[2] 

Thursday, October 11, 2012

Negative aspects of strict personal information protection

To create a whole picture of personal information protection I also decided to study the other side of the argument – too strict personal information protection. Too strong protection of individual’s personal information can also have negative aspects. Kang presented two of them: negative aspect on commerce and it can also affect truthfulness.[1]

Thursday, October 4, 2012

Personal information as Intellectual Property

The idea about propertization of personal information could also include the view of personal information as individual’s intellectual property. Granting individuals property rights over their personal information might increase the level of privacy protection in cyberspace.[1] 

Tuesday, September 25, 2012

Personal information as a commodity

Companies “provides something of value, usually software, in exchange for something from a consumer that is also of value, namely personal data.[1]


Source: Imgur: the simple image sharer .[2]


Wednesday, September 19, 2012

Right to privacy – Article 8 of ECHR


Here I briefly presented the Right to Privacy, which is protected on an international and a national level, and its future development in European Union. Historically the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) are the initial international documents that protect the Right to privacy. Article 17 of the ICCPR states that “No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.”[1]

Thursday, August 30, 2012

General interpretation of personal information

There has been various definitions about what should be included in interpetation of personal information. Here I have presented four different definitions: the definition od the Data protection Directive; Business dictionary's definition; definition, which Kang presented in his article “Information Privacy in Cyberspace Transactions” and the European Union Commission’s definition of personal information.

Saturday, August 25, 2012

Minimal level of personal information protection

As more private lives are exported online, reasonable expectations are diminishing.”[1] Internet and especially the presence of social networks have affected individual’s idea of privacy. Furthermore, nowadays people daily share their personal information online and the idea of what is considered as private is entering a gray zone. “When our reasonable expectations diminish, as they have, by necessity our legal protection diminishes.”[2] Ordinary people, anonymous individuals are turning into celebrities. Should therefore the level of personal information protection follow? 

Thursday, July 5, 2012

Individual’s interest in control over personal information


Why is an individual interested in his personal information? Basho in her article in her article “The Licensing of Our Personal Information: Is It a Solution to Internet Privacy?” cited a German court, which explained that “if someone cannot predict with sufficient certainty which information about himself in certain areas is known to his social milieu, and cannot estimate sufficiently the knowledge of parties to whom communication may possibly be made, he is crucially inhibited in his freedom to plan or to decide freely.[1] Privacy threatens influence individuals participation on the Internet – consequently individuals present themselves online with false personal information or even avoid situations when their personal information might be exposed.[2] And in order that an individual can fully enjoy benefits of the Internet, he must be protected against use and misuse of his personal information without his approval.[3]