General Data Protection Regulation - Heads Up

[anonymous-user]

My apologies if this has been done to death here already. Businesses need to be thinking about how to adapt to the General Data Protection Regulation when it comes into force on 25 May 2018.

Here is a summary from the ICO -

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/data-protecti...

[PixelpeepS3]

Breadvan72 said:

My apologies if this has been done to death here already. Businesses need to be thinking about how to adapt to the General Data Protection Regulation when it comes into force on 25 May 2018.

Here is a summary from the ICO -

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/data-protecti...

Thanks for this BV - projected paranoia of this will reach Y2K bug levels before long i feel.

quite frightening how many people who should know this stuff are still blissfully unaware.

[Frimley111R]

Keep up at the back...

https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

[anonymous-user]

Bad search-fu.

[plasticpig]

I was rather hoping the House Of Lords would get to vote on amendment 7

Hansard said:

(4) This Act does not apply to any organisation employing five employees or fewer.(5) Organisations covered by subsection (4) include, but are not limited to—(a) small businesses,(b) charities,(c) parish councils.

[CzechItOut]

plasticpig said:

I was rather hoping the House Of Lords would get to vote on amendment 7

Hansard said:

(4) This Act does not apply to any organisation employing five employees or fewer.(5) Organisations covered by subsection (4) include, but are not limited to—(a) small businesses,(b) charities,(c) parish councils.

That amendment shows a fundamental lack of understanding of GDPR. Any exclusion should be based upon data held, not number of employees.

It effectively suggests that a company of five employees who scrap millions of records of personal data are exempt, while a company of six employees who hold a very small number of personal records have to comply.

[Stupeo]

A good summary of questions about GPDR here: https://www.red-gate.com/simple-talk/opinion/opini...

[Eric Mc]

The great thing about leaving the EU is that we can ditch all this additional and burdensome bureaucracy.....oh wait!

(Boris - why aren't you voting against stuff like this?)

[Australiam]

Eric Mc said:

The great thing about leaving the EU is that we can ditch all this additional and burdensome bureaucracy.....oh wait!

(Boris - why aren't you voting against stuff like this?)

Sorry - a little facetious, but written with a smile, and in the interest of debate, (not a personal dig at anyones opinions):

Because:

- GDPR applies to organisations holding data on EU citizens regardless of whether they are in Europe or not. So Borris can vote all he likes, but any of us that wish to trade with Europe would need to comply regardless. (many organisations around the world outside of the EU are currently working on GDPR)

- Our 1998 Data Protection Act was woefully outdated, to the point of being worthless in many areas, carried insufficient weight, and was well overdue an overhaul.

- maybe Borris does not want his personal information used indiscriminately by somebody else, and sees this as a way to address that?

The Data Protection Bill seeks to redress the balance back in favour of you and I the individual, and meet the demands of what will be our largest trading partner. So I am not sure why Borris or anyone else would want to vote against it? (If Borris or anyone else would vote for some amendments, and a lot more clarity to make it easier for organisations to comply, then I agree!)

Knowing how many sales calls my elderly parents receive, despite being on the TPS, on balance, I am looking forward to the updated regulation.

[CzechItOut]

Interesting court case in the States, which seemingly flies in the face of the spirit of GDPR.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/14/hiq_linke...

hiQ screen-scrape profiles from LinkedIn and use that data to provide "analytics". LinkedIn block hiQ's bots. Court rules in hiQ's favour.

In my opinion, this will be illegal under GDPR, as hiQ will not have a persons consent to store and process their data.

SAR and RTBF to hiQ on 26th May 2018.

[plasticpig]

DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.

In case it escaped your notice HiQ Labs is a US company and the court case was in the US. Why would a US court take EU law into account? If a US company has no presence in the EU how is the EU going to enforce GDPR on it?

[craigjm]

[quote]
- GDPR applies to organisations holding data on EU citizens regardless of whether they are in Europe or not. So Borris can vote all he likes, but any of us that wish to trade with Europe would need to comply regardless. (many organisations around the world outside of the EU are currently working on GDPR)

- Our 1998 Data Protection Act was woefully outdated, to the point of being worthless in many areas, carried insufficient weight, and was well overdue an overhaul.

- maybe Borris does not want his personal information used indiscriminately by somebody else, and sees this as a way to address that?

The Data Protection Bill seeks to redress the balance back in favour of you and I the individual, and meet the demands of what will be our largest trading partner. So I am not sure why Borris or anyone else would want to vote against it? (If Borris or anyone else would vote for some amendments, and a lot more clarity to make it easier for organisations to comply, then I agree!)

Knowing how many sales calls my elderly parents receive, despite being on the TPS, on balance, I am looking forward to the updated regulation.

[/quote]

It amazes me how many leavers have assumed EU law will become fire wood after we leave as if we don’t live in a globalised world

[Frimley111R]

I've just been talking to someone about the forthcoming e-privacy legislation/direction and that sounds even worse than GDPR! If we don't change it for the UK it could completely change the entire way we sell B2B products and services...! (I hope I have this wrong but...)

[Eric Mc]

DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.

Do those two sentences not contradict each other?

[Eric Mc]

DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.

Sorry to hear about your father in law.

[plasticpig]

Frimley111R said:

I've just been talking to someone about the forthcoming e-privacy legislation/direction and that sounds even worse than GDPR! If we don't change it for the UK it could completely change the entire way we sell B2B products and services...! (I hope I have this wrong but...)

As it stands PECR will give legal persons the same right to privacy for communications as a natural person under Article 8 of the ECHR. That on the face of it is a ludicrous idea.

[Frimley111R]

DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.

How can that ever hope to be remotely enforceable outside the EU? It may be enforceable with some huge companies but not for a multitude of smaller cos.

[anonymous-user]

It is commonplace for regulatory rules set by one jurisdiction to affect international businesses in other jurisdictions. For example, UK banks have to deal with Federal laws such as FATCA. The US is notable for its use of exorbitant jurisdiction in various contexts. The EU exerts exorbitant jurisdiction by applying various standards to those trading with EU member states. Hence GDPR is a thing, Brexit or no Brexit. Indeed, even the hardest of hard Brexits will see the UK still having to comply with some aspects of EU law (but with zero input into making or changing EU law).

[Eric Mc]

Apparently Norway applies 95% of EU directives - even though it's not in the EU.

[anonymous-user]

Norway has a sucky deal - very expensive. It does get to go to meetings about rules and has some influence but no direct voting or veto rights. The will of the people is that Britain should be subject to EU rules but have little or no say in making them. Because freedom. Yay!