dataretention   607

« earlier    

Quitting Facebook & Google: Why Exit Option Democracy is the Worst Kind of Democracy
Just how easy is it to opt out of corporate data collection? Are you just a luddite if you do choose to opt out? And what are the costs?
facebook  google  datacollection  dataretention  data  smartphone  technology 
5 weeks ago by herdivineshadow
Cornell Food Researcher Brian Wansink's Downfall Raises Larger Questions For Science : The Salt : NPR
"JAMA, a journal published by the American Medical Association, had retracted six of Wansink's studies, after Cornell told the journal's editors that Wansink had not kept the original data and the university could not vouch for the validity of his studies"
misconduct  dataRetention 
october 2018 by kbriney
Twitter
RT : BAILII now has the Liberty v Home Office judgment on and the
dataretention  IPAct  from twitter
april 2018 by Surliminal
Twitter
RT : The UK law Senator Brandis used as a model for Australia’s regime has been reaffirmed as unlawful by…
dataretention  from twitter
january 2018 by kcarruthers
UK mass digital surveillance regime ruled unlawful
Liberty, the human rights campaign group which represented Watson in the case, said the ruling meant significant parts of the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 – known as the snooper’s charter – are effectively unlawful and must be urgently changed.

The court of appeal ruling on Tuesday said the powers in the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014, which paved the way for the snooper’s charter legislation, did not restrict the accessing of confidential personal phone and web browsing records to investigations of serious crime, and allowed police and other public bodies to authorise their own access without adequate oversight.

The three judges said Dripa was “inconsistent with EU law” because of this lack of safeguards, including the absence of “prior review by a court or independent administrative authority”.
¶¶
Martha Spurrier, the director of Liberty, said: “Yet again a UK court has ruled the government’s extreme mass surveillance regime unlawful. This judgement tells ministers in crystal clear terms that they are breaching the public’s human rights.”
by:AlanTravis  from:TheGuardian  surveillance  privacy  politics  geo:UnitedKingdom  TomWatson  InvestigatoryPowersAct2016  DataRetention 
january 2018 by owenblacker
Twitter
New law on extends retention period for data to six years. Criticism b…
telecommunications  Italian  DataRetention  from twitter_favs
december 2017 by Surliminal
Twitter
RT : As law and order types say about and : if you have nothing to hide in an open, free and…
dataretention  surveillance  from twitter
november 2017 by kcarruthers
Tech companies endure near-doubling of requests for personal data
Please use the sharing tools found via the email icon at the top of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour.
https://www.ft.com/content/b754882e-8cbd-11e7-9084-d0c17942ba93

The US and UK governments have almost doubled their requests to obtain data from technology, media and telecoms companies over the past three years, highlighting a growing regulatory burden for businesses that are preparing for many more requests, under tough new EU privacy rules.

The number of times 26 companies — including AOL, AT&T, Facebook, Google and LinkedIn — were asked to assist the UK and US governments with investigations in 2016 increased to 704,678, up from just 354,970 three years previously, according to an analysis of public data by Deloitte, the consultancy.

The surge will vindicate claims from some companies that they face an impossible task in dealing with requests for information. Technology groups have warned that this challenge will increase dramatically under the General Data Protection Regulation, which will give EU citizens more rights over their data.

“You’ve gone from a situation 15 to 20 years ago where these requests were few and far between but, over time, the number of requests has increased and alongside that the variety of requests,” said Peter Robinson, partner at Deloitte. “Dealing with them is quite time-consuming, risky and expensive.”

The 2016 figure reflects an average of 27,103 requests for each company, or 74 per company per day. The number is much higher for some groups, with Facebook’s transparency report showing it received 61,703 requests for data from the US and UK governments last year.

The more data requests you get, the more employees and people you need to have to respond to these requests — but also to check that the requests are valid

THOMAS BOUÉ, DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF EUROPE, MIDDLE EAST AND AFRICA POLICY AT THE BUSINESS SOFTWARE ALLIANCE
The results will add to a sense that assistance from public companies has become integral to law enforcement, as technological advances give companies more insight into people’s lives. The concern for businesses is that the costs of compliance could increase to unmanageable levels — especially if GDPR leads to an increase in requests from private citizens in the EU.

“The more data requests you get, the more employees and people you need to have to respond to these requests — but also to check that the requests are valid,” said Thomas Boué, director-general of Europe, Middle East and Africa policy at the Business Software Alliance, an industry group. “It creates additional requirements for companies in terms of staff and legal costs . . . to hire the legal expertise to analyse requests.”

Governments can ask for data through legal means such as court orders and search warrants, but technology companies have frequently resisted these requests in the past. In a closely watched case last year, for example, the US government dropped its court fight against Apple after it refused to help the FBI break into an iPhone used by the perpetrators who killed 14 people in a terror shooting in San Bernardino, California.

According to data privacy campaigners, bombarding companies could make it more difficult for them to fight government orders. “Because data requests vary so much, it’s difficult to tell what is really at stake,” said Tomaso Falchetta, advocacy and policy lead at Privacy International. “Companies can play a role in resisting requests . . . that’s a role they should continue to play.”

RECOMMENDED

Tech sector struggles to prepare for EU data laws
Companies need to embrace data laws regardless of burden
Deloitte’s data showed that most government requests between 2013 and 2016 were made in the form of subpoenas or court orders that usually only allow the disclosure of simple information, such as the name associated with an email account, or the date when it was created. However 12.3 per cent of the cases over the three years were through search warrants that could allow governments to probe the content of messages, documents, photos and videos.

“The Investigatory Powers Act ensures that the security and intelligence agencies and law enforcement have the powers they need to keep us safe from terrorism and other crimes, subject to world-leading oversight and robust safeguards,” said a spokesperson for the UK’s Home Office when asked for comment.

An official from the US Department of Justice said the number of people using data services had increased, driving the need for law enforcement requests. “Companies engaged in this type of communications service are some of the largest and wealthiest companies in the history of the world,” the person said.

“The regulatory burden from lawful requests has not kept them from record-setting growth and profits, often increasing year-over year. It should be expected that, as more people worldwide use their services, driving ad and subscription revenue, the law enforcement need for data from them would also increase.”

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2017. All rights reserved. You may share using our article tools. Please don't copy articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web.
lang:en  privacy  law  enforcement  Dataretention 
august 2017 by hugoroy

« earlier    

related tags

&  9/11  abuse  accountability  act  activism  activist  activists  algorithm  and  angela  anonymity  anpr  apple  assange  attack  auspol  austerity  australia  backdoor  backdoors  balances  barackobama  big  bill  biometrics  bnd  british  brother  bulk  by:alantravis  by:matthewweaver  cablegate  cameron  career  cctv  charter  checks  chelsea  china  cia  cisa  cjeu  collection  complex  consent  conservative  constitution  copyright  corporate  court  courts  crime  cryptography  cryptopocalypse  cyber  data  dataanalysis  datacollection  datacuration  datahorrorstories  datamining  dataownership  datapolicy  dataprotection  datasharing  david  democracy  digitalpreservation  doctor  dogma  droit  drugs  décision  edward  empire  encryption  enforcement  espionage  eu  extremism  facebook  fbi  fisa  fisaaa  foia  framing  france  freedom  from:theguardian  gchq  gdpr  geo:unitedkingdom  george  germany  getavpn  google  government  gps  groups  gun  hegemony  history  homescreen  horrorstories  human  identity  ideology  industrial  injustice  interest  internet  intervention  investigative  investigatory  investigatorypowersact2016  ipact  ipbill  iraq  isis  islamic  italian  journalism  journalismus  julian  justice  lang:en  lang:fr  law  linux  lobby  lobbying  lobbyist  lrens  lscpt  lügenpresse  manning  manufactured  maximisation  may  media  medical  merkel  meta  metadata  mi5  mi6  military  military–industrial  mirror  misconduct  mobile  mobilephone  nasty  national  natsec  neoconservatism  neoconservatives  no  nsa  numericable  of  on  openscience  organised  orwellian  osborne  oversight  paris  party  patriot  patriotism  pentagon  personaldata  photos  pnr  polarisation  police  politicians  politics  populism  positioning  power  powers  pr  preservation  presidency  press  pressefreiheit  pressreleaseonly  privacy  profiling  profit  profiteer  propaganda  radicalisation  radicalism  radicalization  rechtsstaat  repository  representation  research  responsibledata  retainer  retractions  rights  russia  science  secret  security  self-censorship  separation  shareholder  smartphone  smoke  smoking  snapchat  snoopers  snooperscharter  snowden  social  society  spin  state  street  successstories  surveillance-industrial  surveillance  system  technology  telecommunications  terror  thedrum  theresa  tisa  tomwatson  tonyporter  tor  tories  tpp  transparency  transport  ttip  tw  twitter  uk  unrechtsstaat  usa  value  vested  vorratsdatenspeicherung  wall  war  watson  wertegesellschaft  whatsapp  whistleblower  wikileaks  willperrin  wmd  yahoo! 

Copy this bookmark:



description:


tags: