The importance does not seem to be merely the DPA aspects relating to the
domestic purpose exemption, or where the first publishing took place, there
are a multitude of other facets to the apparent circumstances surrounding
the removal of the item from YouTube not least of which is how is the DPA
applied to items published via that site, as it appears to have been broadly
accepted without exception that the DPA applies to personal data published
there; Which in itself has very broad implications both for YouTube and more
broadly as the data on these sites has/is the subject of much DP abuse.
Consider the s.32 exemptions as one facet (the subject matter would
ordinarily certainly seem to be newsworthy), another is that in privacy
terms what difference would exist if the video had been a textual account of
the meeting published in another area, would that have been removed? If not
why not and what conceptual differences exist between graphical accounts and
textual accounts? The deception involved in covert filming aside, free
speech issues also abound as factual accuracy would seem to be assured in
this case within the chosen media.
Briefly looking to developments in this field on the internet I understand
some sites are now facilitating the data subject controlling access to any
data published that in itself would seem to indicate heightening privacy
awareness and a method of retaining the domestic purposes exemption?
All my comments are made without recourse to the YouTube video or broader
considerations to any real depth.
Ian W
> -----Original Message-----
> From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection
> issues [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> POUNDER Chris
> Sent: 23 August 2007 14:17
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: UTube video removed
>
>
> The important factor is that the domestic purpose exemption
> is lost if you post personal data on the Internet.
>
> This is a result of the Lindqvist case which is binding on
> the UK. It means that the S.36 exemption has to be
> interpreted in the light of Lindqvist
>
> C
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection
> issues [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Nick Landau
> Sent: 23 August 2007 13:22
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [data-protection] UTube video removed
>
> I had to look up what you were referring to - here is the Outlaw link
>
> http://www.out-law.com/page-8401
>
> Nick Landau
>
> The Numbers Game
> http://www.numbers-game.co.uk
>
> Nick Landau's Profile on LinkedIn.com
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/nicklandau1
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ian Welton" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 1:15 PM
> Subject: [data-protection] UTube video removed
>
>
> > The Vanessa Brookes video on UTube which OUTLAW and Rebecca
> Wong have
> > produced articles on appears to have been removed from UTube under a
> terms
> > of use violation. No mention or indication of DP though or any
> mention of
> > any potential exemptions.
> >
> > Ian W
> >
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|