How Privacy Laws Are Changing To Protect Personal Information

[ad_1]
<div _ngcontent-c14 = "" innerhtml = "

Over 2.5 quintillion bytes of data are created each day. Much of this information consists of information that would be personally and personally identified (or, personal information).

There are currently over 2 billion active Facebook users. Every minute, about half a million snapchat users share photos while Instagram adds another 50,000 photos to that total. There are half a million tweets feeling every minute. The amount of personal information that is being exchanged each day is staggering and growing.

At the same time, we are growing up with information that is collected, used and shared at scale. While many jurisdictions like Canada and the United States of America, the laws of the United States and the United States In the US, new legislation has been introduced or is being considered at federal and state levels.

Changes to privacy laws are being fired through by the public with the idea of ​​unfettered data accumulation and use. Par exemple,

• this year, Ipsos and the World Economic Forum released, Global Citizens and Data Privacy, which found that 1/3 of global citizens are ignorant about how their personal information is used by companies and governments and that trust is lacking. The report also states that citizens do not trust companies or governments to use their personal data in "the right way";
• A 2019 report by the Center for the Governance of AI – Future of the Humanity Institute, Oxford University, entitled, Artificial Intelligence: American Attitudes and TrendsAI-enhanced cyber attacks, surveillance, and digital manipulation, the most likely to be the largest number of people in the world. and,
• at 2017 Pew Research Center, Americans and Cybersecurity, shown that 50% of Americans believe that they are less secure today than it was five years ago.

Regulation, often slow to adapt to the pace of innovation, is starting to catch up with the extent of personal information being transmitted every minute.

How to privacy is adapting to innovation and why we care

Privacy laws are changing to address the real and perceived risks of harm resulting from the under- or unregulated data economy.

The EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)

The EU has made significant reforms to the subject of protecting the environment, promoting competition and wrestling the ever-growing power of the hands of the few. The GDPR, which came into effect in May 2018, replaced the European Directive 95/46 / EC and introduced strict requirements for those of the EU residents. The GDPR's stated objectives focus on the protection of personal information, "the free movement of personal data" and "the fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons to the protection of their personal data".

Here are a few things that are particularly striking about the GDPR:

• extraterritorial reach, meaning that the GDPR is applicable to the EU (Article 3);
• the right to be forgotten, which includes the right to have one's personal data on a certain system (Article 17);
• the right to move data from one controller to another under certain circumstances and where technically feasible (Article 20);
• the right not to be subject to automated decision-making including profiling (Article 22);
• Mandatory reporting of a personal data breach unless breach is "unlikely to result in a risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons". Notification is required within 72 hours after having become aware of the breach (Article 33);
• 20 million, whichever is greater (Art 83 (5)).

While the stated objectives of the GDPR are grounded in the values ​​of self-determination and protection of privacy, among others, another point of view is that the EU's main motivation is much simpler: competitiveness.

A recent article in The Economist, Why big tech should fear Europe, Europe is home to one of the world's valuable technology firms. Europe has enacted such far-reaching legislation to restore stability and control to governments and to prevent anti-competitive behavior where data (and thus power) are accumulated by a few.

The Economist 's article summarized the point well:

… the EU is pioneering a distinct tech- nology that aims to give them control over their own information and the benefits of it. If the doctrine works, it could benefit millions of users, boost the economy and constrain tech giants that have gathered immense power without a commensurate sense of responsibility.

The United States

Some US states are also entering the ring in the fight for control – California being out front. Tea California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), which comes into effect on January 1, 2020, with GDPR principles to provide greater control over their personal information. The CCPA establishes "a legal and enforceable right of privacy for every Californian" and will:

• require businesses à la collection de disclosures sur les collection de l'information de l'information de l'information de l'information et d'information et personal de l'information;
• Authorize consumers to opt-out of having their personal information sold by a business while prohibiting that business of discriminating against the consumer for exercising this right;
• authorize businesses to provide financial incentives for the collection of personal information;
• prohibiting businesses from selling the information of consumers under the age of 16 years;
• require data breach notification.

According to the NYU Journal of Intellectual Property and Entertainment LawA number of US states have pbaded And this localized approach to regulating privacy is a prerequisite for harmonizing federal privacy law. The argument goes that a federal law would avoid inconsistent and overlapping legislation.

This past fall, it was reported that representatives from Amazon, Apple, AT & T, and Google urged Congress to implement federal privacy legislation. There is a sense that privacy legislation is on the horizon in the US.

Canada

Canada has also undergone review and change of some of its privacy regulation. Canada has overlapping federal and provincial laws as well as sector-specific privacy laws. This past summer, the federal Minister of Innovation data and digital transformation consultations to better shape Canada's approach to innovation. As one of six experts appointed by the Minister for Conducting Consultations on the subject, I heard a number of companies, academics and civic organizations talking about greater national and international harmonization of privacy laws and other investments in cybersecurity, among other things.

On November 1, 2018, an amendment to Canada's federal privacy law, Personal Information and Protection of the Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA). All data breaches must be documented by the company and that document must be retained for up to two years.

A few months later, the federal Privacy Commissioner issued rulers that focus as much on substance as they do on form (i.e. just-in-time information when will consent). The guidelines were the result of public consultations as well.

Also in 2018, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Privacy and Ethics PIPEDA. The report included several significant recommendations including measures to improve algorithmic transparency and the reflections on the usefulness of maintaining a consent-based model.

These are three examples of jurisdictions that are actively pursuing more progressive privacy laws. One important consideration is to harmonize global standards for best practices involving the collection, storage and use of personal information. This will facilitate compliance with the provisions of the Agreement, which will provide greater certainty of the rules of engagement, and will provide a valuable signal to the public.

">

Over 2.5 quintillion bytes of data are created each day. Much of this information consists of information that would be personally and personally identified (or, personal information).

There are currently over 2 billion active Facebook users. Every minute, about half a million snapchat users share photos while Instagram adds another 50,000 photos to that total. There are half a million tweets feeling every minute. The amount of personal information that is being exchanged each day is staggering and growing.

At the same time, we are growing up with information that is collected, used and shared at scale. While many jurisdictions like Canada and the United States of America, the laws of the United States and the United States In the US, new legislation has been introduced or is being considered at federal and state levels.

Changes to privacy laws are being fired through by the public with the idea of ​​unfettered data accumulation and use. Par exemple,

• This year, Ipsos and the World Economic Forum released, Global Citizens and Data Privacy, which found that 1/3 of global citizens are ignorant about how their personal information is used by companies and governments. The report also states that citizens do not trust companies or governments to use their personal data in "the right way";
• A 2019 report by the Center for the Governance of AI – Future of Humanity Institute, Oxford University, entitled, Artificial Intelligence: American Attitudes and Trends, found that the majority of Americans identify data privacy, AI-enhanced cyber attacks, surveillance, and digital manipulation, l'estable dans la governance des risques; and,
• a 2017 Pew Research Center, Americans and Cybersecurity, showed that 50% of Americans believe that they are safe today.

Regulation, often slow to adapt to the pace of innovation, is starting to catch up with the extent of personal information being transmitted every minute.

How to privacy is adapting to innovation and why we care

Privacy laws are changing to address the real and perceived risks of harm resulting from the under- or unregulated data economy.

The EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)

The EU has made significant reforms to the subject of protecting the environment, promoting competition and wrestling the ever-growing power of the hands of the few. The GDPR, which came into effect in May 2018, replaced the European Directive 95/46 / EC and introduced strict requirements for those of the EU residents. The GDPR's stated objectives focus on the protection of personal information, "the free movement of personal data" and "the fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons to the protection of their personal data".

Here are a few things that are particularly striking about the GDPR:

• extraterritorial reach, meaning that the GDPR is applicable to the EU (Article 3);
• the right to be forgotten, which includes the right to have one's personal data on a certain system (Article 17);
• the right to move data from one controller to another under certain circumstances and where technically feasible (Article 20);
• the right not to be subject to automated decision-making including profiling (Article 22);
• Mandatory reporting of a personal data breach unless breach is "unlikely to result in a risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons". Notification is required within 72 hours after having become aware of the breach (Article 33);
• 20 million, whichever is greater (Art 83 (5)).

While the stated objectives of the GDPR are grounded in the values ​​of self-determination and protection of privacy, among others, another point of view is that the EU's main motivation is much simpler: competitiveness.

A recent article in The Economist, Why big tech should fear Europe, reported that the US is home to 15 of the world's valuable technology firms, while Europe is home to one. Europe has enacted such far-reaching legislation to restore stability and control to governments and to prevent anti-competitive behavior where data (and thus power) are accumulated by a few.

The Economist 's article summarized the point well:

… the EU is pioneering a distinct tech- nology that aims to give them control over their own information and the benefits of it. If the doctrine works, it could benefit millions of users, boost the economy and constrain tech giants that have gathered immense power without a commensurate sense of responsibility.

The United States

Some US states are also entering the ring in the fight for control – California being out front. Tea California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), which comes into effect on January 1, 2020, with GDPR principles to provide greater control over their personal information. The CCPA establishes "a legal and enforceable right of privacy for every Californian" and will:

• require businesses à la collection de disclosures sur les collection de l'information de l'information de l'information de l'information et d'information et personal de l'information;
• Authorize consumers to opt-out of having their personal information sold by a business while prohibiting that business of discriminating against the consumer for exercising this right;
• authorize businesses to provide financial incentives for the collection of personal information;
• prohibiting businesses from selling the information of consumers under the age of 16 years;
• require data breach notification.

According to the NYU Journal of Intellectual Property and Entertainment Law, a number of US states. And this localized approach to regulating privacy is a prerequisite for harmonizing federal privacy law. The argument goes that a federal law would avoid inconsistent and overlapping legislation.

This past fall, it was reported that representatives from Amazon, Apple, AT & T, Google and Twitter urged Congress to implement federal privacy legislation. There is a sense that privacy legislation is on the horizon in the US.

Canada

Canada has also undergone review and change of some of its privacy regulation. Canada has overlapping federal and provincial laws as well as sector-specific privacy laws. This past summer, the federal Minister of Innovation, is launching a new format. As one of six experts appointed by the Minister for Conducting Consultations on the subject, I heard a number of companies, academics and civic organizations talking about greater national and international harmonization of privacy laws and other investments in cybersecurity, among other things.

On November 1, 2018, an amendment to Canada's federal privacy law, Personal Information and Protection of the Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA). All data breaches must be documented by the company and that document must be retained for up to two years.

Only a few months later, the federal Privacy Commissioner's Guidelines for Consumers agree that they focus on just as much substance as they do (just-in-time information when obtaining consent). The guidelines were the result of public consultations as well.

Also in 2018, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics, PIPEDA. The report included several significant recommendations including measures to improve algorithmic transparency and the reflections on the usefulness of maintaining a consent-based model.

These are three examples of jurisdictions that are actively pursuing more progressive privacy laws. One important consideration is to harmonize global standards for best practices involving the collection, storage and use of personal information. This will facilitate compliance with the provisions of the Agreement, which will provide greater certainty of the rules of engagement, and will provide a valuable signal to the public.