I don't think that the DPA world can ignore what the Commissioner is
doing with the personal data issue in FOI. It's directly relevant to the
Calderdale situation, for example. When (effectively) arguing that
people like me should lower their expectations how far our rights over
professionally related personal data, the Commissioner relies on a
formula that it's lawful and fair to process personal data by way of an
FOI disclosure because disclosure is a legitimate interest which doesn't
infringe the rights and freedoms of the Data Subject. So, if that works
for FOI, why couldn't it work for a person who wanted an accurate record
of a conversation with a social worker, regardless of whether the social
worker consents or not?
That still leaves the issue of posting it online, but I think the
Commissioner has deliberately reduced the extent to which a public
sector employee can legitimately expect to asked for permission before
data about them is disclosed. I see no obvious reason why this approach
is hermetically sealed to apply only to FOI requests.
Tim Turner
Data Protection / FOI Officer
Legal and Property Services
Wigan Council
-----Original Message-----
From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection issues
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Roland Perry
Sent: Fri 24 August 2007 13:08
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [data-protection] UTube video removed
In message
<[log in to unmask]>,
at 08:29:11 on Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Tim Turner <[log in to unmask]>
writes
>The problem with this is that even if the person who uploads the images
>onto YouTube has breached the Data Protection Act, the only way in
>which action can be taken against them is if YouTube admit who did it.
>And presumably, it's entirely possible to put clips onto YouTube
>without the company actually know who you are.
That's not the point, really, as infringing material is infringing, even
if the poster was anonymous. YouTube's policies should be about the
nature of the infringement, not the person who uploaded it. Although I
could see some grey areas where they could claim that the clips didn't
involve anyone from the UK/EU, although witnesses might be able to put
them right about that in the fullness of time.
>So even if a law has been breached, it's still going to be YouTube's
>choice as to whether to take it down on the basis that it would be
>difficult to take them to court here to obtain the name of the
uploader.
Most ISPs have policies that allow them to reveal what [maybe little]
they know, to law enforcement, without needing to go to the courts, as
long as the correct paperwork is done. But that does require them to be
minded to co-operate at all (despite the potential legal ramifications
of not).
>Going back to the original story about the lady and her social workers,
>under FOI, the Information Commissioner has been doing a very
>determined job of drawing a line between personal data held by a public
>authority about its employees' personal and private business, and data
>about its employees doing their job. Even though he often accepts that
>data about employees doing their jobs has a personal aspect to it, he
>stills orders it to be disclosed.
Surely all that's doing is confirming that these things are personal
data, and making distinctions between different sorts of personal data
(for FOI purposes) that aren't necessarily relevant for DPA purposes.
>Would the lady have needed consent? She might have had another
>condition for processing, at least as far as recording the
>conversations,
I'd be interested (as a separate issue) to fully understand what's
allowed by way of such recordings, if they are only used privately by
the interviewee. After all, people are allowed to make written notes
about the person interviewing them (I assume).
>even if she didn't have a condition for putting it on YouTube (and I'm
>not saying she couldn't justify doing that, I just don't know).
--
Roland Perry
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
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 http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
Any queries about sending or receiving messages please send to the list
owner
[log in to unmask]
Full help Desk - please email [log in to unmask] describing your
needs
To receive these emails in HTML format send the command:
SET data-protection HTML to [log in to unmask]
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>Corporate Disclaimer<<
**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.
This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
Proofpoint for the presence of computer viruses using F-Secure
anti-virus software.
www.proofpoint.com
www.f-secure.com
**********************************************************************
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
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 http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
Any queries about sending or receiving messages please send to the list owner
[log in to unmask]
Full help Desk - please email [log in to unmask] describing your needs
To receive these emails in HTML format send the command:
SET data-protection HTML to [log in to unmask]
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|