I'm coming late to this with potentially nothing helpful to say. However,
isn't there an element of proportionality here? It is not a breach of the
Data Protection Act to buy and sell addresses for marketing purposes - I
think this activity is even on some of the ICO's notification templates. As
postal marketing is the least regulated of all marketing (the Mailing
Preference Service is not even statutory), it is entirely possible that the
address was obtained entirely legally and the marketing material sent in
good faith.
Therefore, rather than spent a tenner on a SAR, would it not be an idea for
the aggrieved party to send a letter asking not to receive any further
marketing from the Daily Mail, and for the data not to be shared for
marketing purposes?
Tim Turner
Wigan Council
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 16:27:05 +0100, Tim Trent
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>In that case SAR to the paper. requiring information on the source of
>the data record.
>
>Nigel Roberts wrote:
>> Tim Trent wrote:
>>> I would need more information in order to answer this. First and
>>> foremost I need to know if the recipient is on the marketing portion
>>> of the electoral roll, or if they have EVER bought or enquired about
>>> anything which could have given the Maily Dale their address.
>>>
>>> If either of those is true, case closed.
>>
>> Neither of those is true.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> The "Newsagent" is a red herring. I have done some heavyweight work
>>> with a national newspaper (not this one). Collecting data form
>>> newsagents is the last thing on their minds. Instead they buy and
>>> mine data, and then associate outbound campaigns with the local
>>> newsagent. Better yet, the newsagent is probably unaware of the
>>> promotion!
>>>
>>> The real thing to do is issue a SAR against the paper and find out
>>> the source of the data record. No point in going to the newsagent.
>>> Counter staff will just not understand the question.
>>>
>>> Nigel Roberts wrote:
>>>> Someone just asked me the attached. I was at a bit of a loss.
>>>>
>>>> In fact as it's a newspaper run promo, could this even be lawful
>>>> disclosure??
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts please (since it's Friday!)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nigel
>>>>
>>>> <Jane Doe> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Had some junk mail from the Daily Mail yesterday offering me a free
>>>> > trial subscription and some M&S vouchers.
>>>> >
>>>> > It is entirely clear how they my address as their blurb says that
>>>> this
>>>> > is a promotion run in conjunction with <local newsagent>
>>>> >
>>>> > I'm sure <local newsagent> broke the law in giving my address to
>>>> > the Daily Mail (which they will have done as I doubt <shop-owner>
>>>> has > the facility to send out glossy mailshots) - but I don't want
>>>> to fall > out with <shop-owner>.
>>>> >
>>>> > Do I
>>>> >
>>>> > - do nothing
>>>> > - complain to the Daily Mail
>>>> > - complain to the ICO/MPS/whoever?
>>>> >
>>>> > A.
>>>
>>> --
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|