There is no new thing under the sun

You may also like...

3 Responses

  1. Mathias says:

    I think the ‘right to be forgotten’ was drafted rather unfortunately; it was never intended to have such broad implications (as highlighted by Rosen for instance). I think the final text of the DPD will see a very narrow right to be forgotten, limiting it to content posted by users themselves (especially) on social network sites. Let’s see.

  2. Damon says:

    The administration’s attempt at codifying FIPPS or the so-called “Consumer Bill of Rights” is founded on the concept that privacy is a consumer right not based on a civil right. One thing the Euros have over the U.S. is that privacy is viewed (or rather data protection) as a fundamental right and codified in the European charter of fundamental rights. The quiltwork approach is unlikely to be dismantled given our political dysfunction and the FTC’s focus on the big users of big data is futile given the limits of its enforcement authority under Section 5 of the FTC act. If privacy is more than a means to generate additional billable hours for the legal profession, then adopting privacy as a fundamental right seems more logical. Otherwise, more and more squares will be added to the quilt and all parties will become disoriented when viewing the patterns.

  3. Red Tape says:

    Great article!

    Privacy legislation has indeed a tendency to be more beneficial to the interests of compliancy and legal professionals, than to the interests such legislation intends to protect. However, getting rid of a patchwork of 27 different implementations of the EU privacy directive will at least be something that the proposed EU Privacy Regulation will achieve…