Advertisement

The Law and Data Protection

  • Ian Berle
Chapter
Part of the Law, Governance and Technology Series book series (LGTS, volume 41)

Abstract

This chapter provides an overview of the range of legislation associated with the regulation of data management. Of special interest here is the status of personal images as ‘data’. The issue of whether photographic or digital images are in fact data creates tensions that until recently did not exist. In other words, the technology has overtaken the legal discourse and has required either that the image data should be assimilated into existing law on a case-by-case basis, or for new laws to be drafted. Therefore, since face recognition is an imaging modality previous statutory instruments are inadequate, and this chapter provides the back-drop to the on-going legal discourse.

References

  1. Acquisti A, Gross R, Stutzman F (2014) Face recognition and privacy in the age of augmented reality. J Privacy Confidentiality 6(2):1.  https://doi.org/10.29012/jpc.v6i2.638. Accessed 24 Aug 2019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agamben G (2005) State of exception (trans: Attell K). The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  3. Amos M (2006) Human rights law. Hart Publishing, Oxford, p 346, an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing PlcGoogle Scholar
  4. Bedat A (2013) Case law, Strasbourg: Von Hannover v Germany (No.3), Glossing over Privacy. http://inforrm.wordpress.com/2013/10/13/case-law-strasbourg-von-hannover-v-germany-no-3-glossing-over-privacy-alexia-bedat/. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  5. Callender Smith R (2012) From Von Hannover to Von Hannover and Axel Springer AG: do competing ECHR proportionality factors ever add up to certainty? (October 25, 2012). Queen Mary J Intellect Property 2(4):388–392. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2037811. Accessed 24 Aug 2019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Campbell (Appellant) v. MGN Limited (Respondents) [2004] UKHL 22 on appeal from: [2002] EWCA Civ 1373. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200304/ldjudgmt/jd040506/campbe-1.htm. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  7. Campbell v MGN Limited [2002] EWHC 499. http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2002/499.htm. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  8. Cohn C, Rodriguez K, Higgins P (2013) Increasing anti-surveillance momentum and the necessary and proportionate principles. Electronic Frontier Foundation, San Francisco. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/12/increasing-anti-surveillance-momentum-and-necessary-and-proportionate-principles. Accessed 24 Aug 2019Google Scholar
  9. Council of the European Union Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31995L0046:en:HTML. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  10. Council of the European Union Regulation (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation). (1). http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-5419-2016-INIT/en/pdf. Accessed 23 Aug 2019
  11. Council of the European Union Regulation 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (General Data Protection Regulation). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1532348683434&uri=CELEX:02016R0679-20160504. Accessed 20 Sept 2019
  12. Data Protection Act 2018, para 33. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2018/12/contents/enacted. Accessed 18 Sept 2019
  13. Drozdiak N, Sam Schechner S (2015) EU court says data-transfer pact with U.S. violates privacy. The Wall Street Journal, October 6th 2015. http://www.wsj.com/articles/eu-court-strikes-down-trans-atlantic-safe-harbor-data-transfer-pact-1444121361. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  14. Edgar TH (2017) Beyond snowden: privacy, mass surveillance and the struggle to reform the NSA. The Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C., pp 164–167Google Scholar
  15. Eglot J (2015) “British judges not bound by European court of human rights, says Leveson”. The Guardian 24th May 2015. http://www.theguardian.com/law/2015/may/24/british-courts-echr-leveson. Accessed 23 Aug 2019
  16. Electronic Frontier Foundation (Necessary and Proportionate.org) 13 International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communication Surveillance. https://necessaryandproportionate.org/principles. Accessed 24 Aug 2019. https://www.eff.org/document/13-international-principles-application-human-rights- communication-surveillance. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  17. EU – US Privacy Shield Framework. https://www.privacyshield.gov/Program-Overview. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  18. European Commission (2016) EU-US privacy shield. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-216_en.htm. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  19. European Commission Memo, 27th January 2014. Data Protection Day 2014: Full speed on EU data protection reform. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-14-60_en.htm. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  20. Federal Trade Commission (2014) FTC settles with twelve companies falsely claiming to comply with international safe harbor privacy framework. http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2014/01/ftc-settles-twelve-companies-falsely-claiming-comply. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  21. Fretty D (2011) Face-recognition surveillance: a moment of truth for fourth amendment rights in public places. Virginia J Law Technol 16(03):444. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/vjolt16&div=16&id=&page=. Accessed 24 Aug 2019Google Scholar
  22. FTC (2012) Protecting consumer privacy in an era of rapid change: Recommendations for businesses and policymakers. http://www.ftc.gov/reports/protecting-consumer-privacy-era-rapid-change-recommendations-businesses-policymakers. Accessed 23 Aug 2019
  23. FTC Report (October 2012) Facing facts: best practices for common uses of facial recognition technologies: executive summary. http://www.ftc.gov/reports/facing-facts-best-practices-common-uses-facial-recognition-technologies. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  24. Human Rights Act (HRA) 1998. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/ukpga_19980042_en_1. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  25. INS v. Delgado, 466 U.S. 210 (1084). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/466/210/. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  26. Jolly I (n.d.) Data protection in the United States: overview, p 2 http://uk.practicallaw.com/6-502-0467#null. Accessed 23 Aug 2019
  27. Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) The warrantless wiretapping of a public pay phone violates the unreasonable search and seizure protections of the Fourth Amendment. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/389/347/case.html. Accessed 23 Aug 2019
  28. Kindt EJ (2013) Privacy and data protection issues of biometric applications. Springer, Dordrecht, p 93 §189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Law Society Gazette (2013) Admissibility- criminal proceedings – evidence obtained through covert surveillance. Re: Kinloch (AP) v Her Majesty’s Advocate (Scotland) and Gilchrist v HM Advocate [2004] SSCR 595. https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/law/evidence/68897.article. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  30. Mallon B (2003) Every breath you take, every move you make, i’ll be watching you: the use of face recognition technology. Villanova Law Rev 48:955. https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/vlr/vol48/iss3/6/. Accessed 24 Aug 2019Google Scholar
  31. Manson NC, O’Neill O (2007) Rethinking informed consent in bioethics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2008] EWHC 1777 (QB), [2008] EMLR 20. http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2008/1777.html. Accessed 23 Aug 2019
  33. Murray v Big Pictures (UK) Ltd [2008] 2008] UKHRR 736, [2008] 3 FCR 661, [2009] Ch 481, [2008] ECDR 12, [2008] Fam Law 732, [2008] 2 FLR 599, [2008] EMLR 12, [2008] HRLR 33, [2008] EWCA Civ 446, [2008] 3 WLR 1360. http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2008/446.html. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  34. Murray v Express Newspapers Plc & Anor [2007] [2007] UKHRR 1322, [2007] HRLR 44, [2008] 1 FLR 704, [2007] ECDR 20, [2007] 3 FCR 331, [2007] EWHC 1908 (Ch), [2007] EMLR 22, [2007] Fam Law 1073. http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2007/1908.html. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  35. Nader v. General Motors Corp., 25 N.Y.2d 560 (N.Y. 1970). https://casetext.com/case/nader-v-general-motors-corp-2. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  36. Nissenbaum H (2010) Privacy in context: technology, policy and the integrity of social life. Stanford University Press, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  37. Parent WA (1983) Privacy, morality and the law. Philos Public Aff 12(4):269–288Google Scholar
  38. Perry v. The United Kingdom. http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-61228. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  39. Privacy by Design: 7 Foundational Principles. https://www.ryerson.ca/pbdce/certification/seven-foundational-principles-of-privacy-by-design/. Accessed 20 Sept 2019
  40. R v Loveridge, EWCA Crim 1034, [2001] 2 Cr App R 29 (2002)Google Scholar
  41. Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/23/pdfs/ukpga_20000023_en.pdf. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  42. Reuters (2012) January 27th ‘Lawmakers press Google on privacy policy changes’. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/27/us-google-privacy- idUSTRE80P1YC20120127. Accessed 23 Aug 2019
  43. Schwartz PM, Solove DJ (2014) Reconciling personal information in the United States and European Union. Calif Law Rev 102:877. https://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/faculty_publications/956. Accessed 23 Aug 2019Google Scholar
  44. Shear B (2013) When will the FTC follow the EU’s lead in protecting digital privacy? https://www.shearlaw.com/when-will-the-ftc-follow-the-eus-lead-in-protecting-digital-privacy/. Accessed 23 Aug 2019
  45. Solove DJ (2008) Understanding privacy. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, p 111Google Scholar
  46. Solove DJ (2011) Nothing to hide: the false trade off between privacy and security. Yale University Press, New Haven, pp 100–101Google Scholar
  47. The European Community Act 1972. https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/1972-european-communities-act. Accessed 23 Aug 2019
  48. United States Department of Health and Human Services. OCR privacy rule summary 2003:17. https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/privacysummary.pdf. Accessed 23 Aug
  49. United States v. Garcia, 474 F 3d 994, 998 (7th Cir. 2007). https://openjurist.org/474/f3d/994/united-states-v-garcia. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  50. United States v. Knotts, 460 U.S. 276 (1983). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/460/276/case.html. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  51. United States v. Maynard, 651 F.3d 544, 555-56 (D.C.Cir.2010). https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-maynard-5. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  52. United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (1980). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/446/544/case.html. Accessed 24 Aug
  53. US Constitution: Fourth Amendment. http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment. Accessed 23 Aug 2019
  54. Viviane Reding, Vice-President of the European Commission, EU Justice Commissioner ‘Data protection compact for Europe’. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-14-62_en.htm. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  55. von Hannover v. Germany (2005) 40 EHRR 1, [2005] 40 EHRR 1, 40 EHRR 1, [2004] EMLR 21, 16 BHRC 545, [2004] ECHR 294. http://www.worldlii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2005/555.html. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  56. Wacks R (1989) (revised 1993) Personal information: privacy and the law. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  57. Welinder Y (2012) A face tells more than a thousand posts: developing face recognition privacy in social networks. http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v26/26HarvJLTech165.pdf. Accessed 24 Aug 2019
  58. Westin A (1967) Privacy and freedom. Atheneum, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  59. Whitehead JW (2013) A Government of wolves: the emerging American Police State. Select Books Inc, New York, p 21Google Scholar
  60. Wicks E (2007) Human rights in healthcare. Hart Publishing, Oxford, an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, p 122Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ian Berle
    • 1
  1. 1.SuttonUK

Personalised recommendations