> This is fascinating stuff.
>
> I can quite understand permission to publish photos and other personal
> details being denied, but I'm amazed that email addresses are going to be
> treated as personal data - I've always regarded email addresses like
> telephone numbers - they are the property of the organisation which
> allocates them, not the individual to whom they are allocated.
I think this is a commonly held belief - it is important to understand
that "personal data" is nothing to do with "ownership" it is simply
"data which relate to a living individual who can be identified from
those data"
This applied to the '84 act as well. We could (arguably) get away with
email lists under '84 because of an exemption which allows for
processing which is "necessary for the purposes of the legitimate
interests pursued by the data controller" unless it predjudices
individuals particular rights, freedoms or interests - though I must say
that in studying the '98 act I'm beginning to think we are already on
shakey ground here!
The BIG difference in the '98 act is the export conditions. Whereas
before simply indicating "global export" on the registration form was
adequate, now export outside EEA requires consent. Consent is defined as
"... any freely given SPECIFIC and INFORMED indication of [the data
subject's] wishes"
All of which rather puts paid to current directories on the web.
Cheers,
Colin
--
_________________________________________________
Colin K. Work
Computing Services
University of Southampton
email [log in to unmask]
tel. 01703 593090 (direct line)
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|