Privacy law

Privacy law refers to the laws which deal with the regulation of personal information about individuals which can be collected by governments and other public as well as private organizations and its storage and use.

Privacy laws are considered in the context of an individual's privacy rights or reasonable expectation of privacy.

Classification of privacy laws

Privacy laws can be broadly classified into:

General privacy laws have an overall bearing on the personal information of individuals and affect the policies that govern many different areas of information.

Specific privacy laws

These laws are designed to regulate specific types of information. Some examples include:

• Health privacy laws
• Financial privacy laws
• Online privacy laws
• Communication privacy laws
• Information privacy laws
• Privacy in one's home

International Legal Standards on Privacy

Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which was drafted and adopted by the Council of Europe in 1950 and meanwhile covers the whole European continent except for Belarus and Kosovo, protects the right to respect for private life: "Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence." Through the huge case-law of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, privacy has been defined and its protection has been established as a positive right of everyone.

Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of the United Nations of 1966 also protects privacy: "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks."

Privacy laws by country

Australia

Main article: Privacy in Australian law

The current state of privacy law in Australia includes Federal and state information privacy legislation, some sector-specific privacy legislation at state level, regulation of the media and some criminal sanctions. The current position concerning civil causes of action for invasion of privacy is unclear: some courts have indicated that a tort of invasion of privacy may exist in Australia; in 2008, the Australian Law Reform Commission recommended the enactment of a statutory cause of action for invasion of privacy.

Brazil

A Brazilian citizen's privacy is protected by the country's constitution, which states:

The intimacy, private life, honor and image of the people are inviolable, with assured right to indenization by material or moral damage resulting from its violation

Canada

Main article: Canadian privacy law

In Canada, the federal Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) governs the collection, use and disclosure of personal information in connection with commercial activities and personal information about employees of federal works, undertakings and businesses. It generally does not apply to non-commercial organizations or provincial governments. Personal information collected, used and disclosed by the federal government and many crown corporations is governed by the Privacy Act. Many provinces have enacted similar provincial legislation such as the Ontario Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act which applies to public bodies in that province.

There remains some debate whether there exists a common law tort for breach of privacy. There have been a number of cases identifying a common law right to privacy but the requirements have not been articulated.

In Eastmond v. Canadian Pacific Railway & Privacy Commissioner of Canada Canada's Supreme Court found that CP could collect Eastmond's personal information without his knowledge or consent because it benefited from the exemption in paragraph 7(1)(b) of PIPEDA, which provides that personal information can be collected without consent if "it is reasonable to expect that the collection with the knowledge or consent of the individual would compromise the availability or the accuracy of the information and the collection is reasonable for purposes related to investigating a breach of an agreement".

• Supreme Court of Canada

India

In June, 2011, India passed a new privacy package that included various new rules that apply to companies and consumers. A key aspect of the new rules requires that any organization that processes personal information must obtain written consent from the data subjects before undertaking certain activities. Application of the rule is still uncertain.

Previously, the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 made changes to the Information Technology Act, 2000 and added the following two sections relating to Privacy:

Section 43A, which deals with implementation of reasonable security practices for sensitive personal data or information and provides for the compensation of the person affected by wrongful loss or wrongful gain.

Section 72A, which provides for imprisonment for a period up to 3 years and/or a fine up to Rs. 5,00,000 for a person who causes wrongful loss or wrongful gain by disclosing personal information of another person while providing services under the terms of lawful contract. yes

New Zealand

In New Zealand, the Privacy Act 1993 sets out principles in relation to the collection, use, disclosure, security and access to personal information.

The introduction into the New Zealand common law of a tort covering invasion of personal privacy at least by public disclosure of private facts was at issue in Hosking v Runting.

Complaints about privacy are considered by the Privacy Commissioner

Republic of China (Taiwan)

Computer Processed Personal Information Protection Act was enacted in 1995 in order to protect personal information processed by computers. The general provision specified the purpose of the law, defined crucial terms, prohibited individuals from waiving certain rights.

Russia

Applicable legislation:

1. Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data, signed and ratified by the Russian Federation on December 19.2005;
2. the Law of the Russian Federation “On Personal Data” as of 27.07.2006 No. 152-FZ, regulating the processing of personal data by means of automation equipment. It is the operator who is required to comply with that Act.

As a general rule consent of the individual is required for processing, i.e. obtaining, organizing, accumulating, holding, adjusting (updating, modifying), using, disclosing (including transfer), impersonating, blocking or destroying of his personal data. This rule doesn't apply where such processing is necessary for performance of the contract, to which an individual is a party.

• Data protection principles and legislation in the Russian Federation (in English)
• On-line database of the Russian laws (in Russian)
• Federal Service on supervising in the sphere of communications, information technology and mass media (in Russian)

United Kingdom

Main article: Privacy in English law

As a member of the European Convention on Human Rights, the United Kingdom adheres to Article 8 ECHR, which guarantees a "right to respect for privacy and family life", subject to restrictions as prescribed by law and necessary in a democratic society towards a legitimate aim.

However, there is no independent tort law doctrine which recognises a right to privacy. This has been confirmed on a number of occasions.

• Kaye v Robertson
• Wainwright v Home Office

United States

Main article: Privacy laws of the United States

The idea of a right to privacy was first addressed within a legal context in the United States. Louis Brandeis (later a Supreme Court justice) and another young lawyer, Samuel D. Warren, published an article called 'The Right to Privacy' in the Harvard Law Review in 1890 arguing that the constitution and the common law allowed for the deduction of a general "right to privacy". Their project was never entirely successful, and the renowned tort expert Dean Prosser argued that "privacy" was composed of four separate torts, the only unifying element of which was a (vague) "right to be left alone." These elements were

1. appropriating the plaintiff's identity for the defendant's benefit
2. placing the plaintiff in a false light in the public eye
3. publicly disclosing private facts about the plaintiff
4. unreasonably intruding upon the seclusion or solitude of the plaintiff

• Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act -- Office for Civil Rights U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

• Financial Services Modernization Act (GLB), 15 U.S. Code §§ 6801-6810
• Final Rule on Privacy of Consumer Financial Information, 16 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 313
• Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 15 U.S. Code §§ 1681-1681u
• Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692-1692
• List of Privacy Laws

See also

Legislation

• Privacy Act of 1974 (US)
• Electronic Communications Privacy Act (US)
• Privacy Act 1988 (Aus)
• Data Protection Directive (EU)
• Data Protection Act 1998 (UK)
• Personality rights
• Data protection (privacy) laws in Russia

External links

• Calo, M. Ryan (December 12, 2011). "The Drone as Privacy Catalyst". Stanford Law Review Online. 64 (Stanford Law School) Stan. L. Rev. Online (29). ISBN 0038-9765. ISSN 1939-8581. Archived from the original on December 31, 2011. http://www.stanfordlawreview.org/system/files/online/articles/64-SLRO-29_0.pdf. Retrieved December 31, 2011. "Associated today with the theatre of war, the widespread domestic use of drones for surveillance seems inevitable. Existing privacy law will not stand in its way. It may be tempting to conclude on this basis that drones will further erode our individual and collective privacy. Yet the opposite may happen. Drones may help restore our mental model of a privacy violation. They could be just the visceral jolt society needs to drag privacy law into the twenty-first century."