Data privacy has long been an issue of public concern, and with changes in online technology, the problem has only deepened. From a legal perspective, a website’s privacy policy essentially functions as an agreement with a site’s users in which the operator seeks consent or agreement from the users to collect and process their personal information. The privacy policy also informs users of the specific type of information the site collects, and how this information will be utilised, processed or shared with third parties.
In this final instalment of an ongoing series on the issues that affect compliance in an ever more complex world Teresa Troester-Falklooks at how organisations can demonstrate compliance using an accountability approach.
In part one of a two part series, we examine some of the challenges that companies face in terms of the evolving privacy and data protection landscape. Data protection and privacy issues are now bedrock strategic issues for companies across the world and Information Security professionals are now under even more pressure to ensure that data remains secure. The value of data as an intangible asset continues to grow and legislation and regulation is becoming ever more stringent. The onus is on companies to comply or suffer the consequences. This is going to require a whole new breed of information security professional. In part two of this series (in next month’s newsletter) we’ll look at the argument for and against a new role combining Chief Security and Privacy Officer in this rapidly evolving regulatory environment.
Improvements to the first Privacy Shield include better data retention provisions and independent Ombudsman, but Data Protection Authorities still cautious.
In this, the final instalment in the series, Pauline C. Reich, Professor and Director of the Asia-Pacific Cyberlaw, Cybercrime and Internet Security Research Institute at the Waseda University School of Law in Tokyo, Japan examines the implications of the recent US v. Apple case in terms of disclosure requirements in Asia and across the globe.
The exit of the United Kingdom from the EU has caused turmoil in world markets and has far reaching consequences for those companies in the European Union doing business with the country – and vice versa. There has also been some uncertainty about how the authorities based in London will be treating data security and privacy issues. The consensus seems to be that companies doing business with the second largest economy in Europe (after Germany) should be adopting a ‘business as usual’ approach. However, will this necessarily be the case in the future? Will global companies with a British connection (including those in Asia) be forced to revisit how they treat data security and privacy issues when dealing with the United Kingdom – and will British companies move away from the rules that have been set in place by Brussels? We take a closer look.
The use and disclosure of personal data for direct marketing purposes is strictly regulated in Hong Kong with more severe consequences for non-compliance than other breaches of Hong Kong privacy law, and is often found to be significantly more onerous than in other jurisdictions. This article summarises some of the key elements of Hong Kong’s direct marketing regime.
The article provides a brief overview of the legal framework relating to data protection and privacy and discusses the provisions of relevant data protection and data privacy laws in India. It also discusses proposed legislative changes in India to strengthen and improve the existing data protection regime.
In this, the third of a series of articles, Pauline C. Reich examines how Asian countries are approaching the thorny issue of cybercrime and the interception of data. The author takes a look at two Southeast Asian countries in particular, Cambodia and the Philippines.
Are individuals more likely to allow use of their data when it’s ‘for the greater good’ – even if permission is not sought? It may be that they don’t have a choice. Even as data protection measures increase and regulatory bodies increase their ability to punish bad behaviour by data custodians, there are still some thorny issues when it comes to the moral and legal obligations governing the sharing of Big Data and personal information.










