The whole point is - it is a joint initiative and for the benefit of both/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [log in to unmask] [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 21 September 2001 10:04
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: re : Subject Access to CCTV - Joint data controllers
>
> In a message dated 21/09/2001 01:46:23 GMT Daylight Time,
> [log in to unmask] writes:
>
> << The term 'joint data controllers' does not exist in the Act itself.
> (Wrong
> -
> I hear you shout). Getting technical I read the 'data controller'
> definition
> in section 1 as singular. It simply appears to indicate the one or more
> persons can decide on the manner of purpose of a data controllers'
> processing. The drafting appears to indicate you have to start with a
> single
> controller. Clearly the 'manner of the processing' may include a decision
> to
> disclose to the other via some form of agreement on data sharing thereby
> making them both data controllers. However that disclosure (processing)
> surely has to be legitimised under the Act from the first to second
> controller. >>
> --------------------
> I believe Dave is right in his analysis. The council MUST be the data
> controller as they alone justify the need, place the bid, purchase the
> equipment, install the equipment (with advice, not control from the
> police)
> in the required locations pointed at the required properties/areas, etc.
>
> If the council decides to employ an outside contractor (whether it be the
> police or a private company) to monitor images and/or change the tapes,
> that
> is their concern but it makes the other organisation a data processor or
> (if
> they actually make use of the data outside the contract terms) a recipient
> and data controller in their own right. If the council does not include
> in
> the contract how they will have access to the images of anti-social
> behaviour, car park fee non-payers, etc., then there is a fault in the
> contract.
>
> What a cosy world it would be if we could get someone else to buy the
> equipment we need for our work and then get them to accept all
> responsibility
> for its use, misuse or abuse.
>
> OK, shoot at me too.
>
>
> Ian Buckland
> MD
> Keep IT Legal Ltd
>
> Please Note: The information contained in this document does not replace
> or
> negate the need for proper legal advice and/or representation. It is
> essential that you do not rely upon any advice given without contacting
> your
> solicitor. If you need further explanation of any points raised please
> contact Keep I.T. Legal Ltd at the address below:
>
> 55 Curbar Curve
> Inkersall, Chesterfield
> Derbyshire S43 3HP
> (Reg 3822335)
> Tel: 01246 473999
> Fax: 01246 470742
> E-mail: [log in to unmask]
> Website: www.keepitlegal.co.uk
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> If you wish to leave this list please send the command
> leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
> All user commands can be found at : -
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/user-manual/summary-user-commands.htm
> all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please!
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
**********************************************************************
This email is privileged, confidential and subject to copyright.
Any unauthorised use or disclosure of its content is prohibited.
The views expressed in this communication may not necessarily
be the views held by Scottish Borders Council
**********************************************************************
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/user-manual/summary-user-commands.htm
all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|