New A.17 right to erasure in the UK_GDPR added during “wash-up”
Hawktalk
by info@amberhawk.com
1M ago
Although the DPDI Bill is dead, you have probably missed the addition to the right to erasure (Article 17 of the UK_GDPR) which was made during “wash-up” period (last month) via another piece of legislation (the Victims and Prisoners Act ["VPA"] 2024). In summary, the change in the law concerns what controllers do when there is a malicious complaint (e.g. to social services) and the procedure for removing that complaint, following the conviction of the complainant of a stalking or harassment offence and a finding that the complaint was malicious.  Phew, a number of conditions to expl ..read more
Visit website
Labour should not let the DPDI Bill go through in “wash-up”; it should kill it off.
Hawktalk
by info@amberhawk.com
2M ago
When a Prime Minister calls a General Election, the Official Opposition in Parliament becomes very powerful.  The reason is that the two main political parties can agree to enact outstanding and uncontroversial pieces of legislation (e.g. in this case, before the end of next week – May 30th).  Parts of the DPDI Bill do fall into this uncontroversial category; but many bits don’t. In summary, the Opposition can say to Government something like; “we will agree to pass the DPDI Bill if you remove Schedule 11 (DWP powers to access bank accounts), the definition of personal data and the n ..read more
Visit website
DPDI Codes of Conduct allow competent authorities to write their own DP rules
Hawktalk
by info@amberhawk.com
3M ago
If, on April 1st,  I reported that a cabal of controllers could club together and draft a Code of Practice that establishes their legal compliance with the UK’s data protection regime, you would probably say that this was too far-fetched to be true. Yet this is the procedure that has been put in place by our the Government for all law enforcement processing of personal data. The grim detail can be found in Clause 68A of the Data Protection and Digital Information (DPDI) Bill.  The production of law enforcement Codes of Conduct (as they are called) does not have to involve any data pr ..read more
Visit website
Government extends privacy protection to bequests made to the Conservative Party
Hawktalk
by info@amberhawk.com
3M ago
Late on Good Friday (a very good time to bury “bad” news), the Government quietly tabled an amendment to the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill  (DPDI Bill) which extends the definition of personal data to include bequests and comments, made by a deceased, in his or her will.  The ICO has welcomed this amendment as a positive change to the law. Although the amendment makes a somewhat quirky change to the Wills Act 1837,  an impeccable sauce has indicated that its main motive is to protect the privacy of bequests of large financial donations to the ruling Conservative P ..read more
Visit website
UK Government abandons Precautionary Principle and tolerates AI abuse risks to data subjects
Hawktalk
by info@amberhawk.com
4M ago
Speakers at the Data Protection Forum in early March reinforced my reasoning that the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill  (“DPDI Bill”) should be used as a vehicle to implement the EU’s AI Act.  [Obviously my Petition which states this should also be supported: so please sign it! – see references]. One speaker, at the end of her presentation, made several personal comments about the risks associated with the fragmentary, “wait and see” approach of the UK Government towards AI regulation. She pointed out that, in the UK, this meant that the five pillars of AI trustworthiness ..read more
Visit website
Petition calls for implementation the EU Data Act to protect data subjects from AI abuse.
Hawktalk
by info@amberhawk.com
5M ago
I am asking readers to sign my Petition on the Parliamentary web-site (see end of this blog); most of the blog's text explains why you should sign. In summary, the Petition states that the Government would be negligent if it failed to draft clauses for the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill  (“DPDI Bill”) to protect data subjects from the harmful impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI). I have suggested that these AI clauses should be aligned with the EU Data Act (see references) and added to the DPDI Bill at Report stage in the House of Lords.  This will preserve the abilit ..read more
Visit website
EU Data Act and DPDI Bill combine to strangle the UK’s AI industry?
Hawktalk
by info@amberhawk.com
7M ago
Most people will agree that the promised “Brexit benefits” have yet to manifest themselves in physical form.  This is especially the case with the Data Protection and Digital Information (“DPDI”) Bill which for three years been touted by Ministers as the pre-eminent Brexit Bonus for Britain. The Bill, it is claimed, combines a high level of data protection for data subjects with easier compliance for controllers and the wider exploitation of personal data:- such data being the new oil in a free-running, modern, data-driven UK economy. Readers of this blog will know I think this claim to b ..read more
Visit website
DPDI No 2 Bill undermines transparency of Artificial Intelligence development and training
Hawktalk
by info@amberhawk.com
9M ago
Last week, Prime Minister asked  “how can we write laws [to regulate AI] that make sense for something we don’t yet fully understand?”.  The PM does not appreciate that his Government has already drafted a law that applies to the processing of personal data for AI purposes but which has the objective of diminishing the protection afforded to data subjects. In this blog, I show, in the context of scientific research, how the proposed DPDI No 2 Bill” (the “Bill” ) permits personal data to be used,  disclosed or transferred outside the UK for AI training and development purposes, i ..read more
Visit website
Serious questions arising from ICO v Clearview Tribunal Decision
Hawktalk
by info@amberhawk.com
9M ago
I was surprised by the recent Tribunal Decision (the “Decision”) which quashed Clearview’s £7.5 million fine on the grounds the UK_GDPR did not apply.   My puzzlement has given rise to several important questions about the Decision. These questions need an urgent answer; hence this blog. Clearview is a USA company which has scraped billions of photos and personal data from the Internet and used them to sell services to law enforcement/national security agencies and similar agencies in other countries (e.g. notably in USA and in South America) but not the EU or UK (wonder why?). Clear ..read more
Visit website
Cronyism at the Information Commission can undermine its regulatory independence
Hawktalk
by info@amberhawk.com
9M ago
I have atoned for not delivering a blog for two months by reading Schedule 13 of the Data Protection and Digital Information No 2 Bill (the “Bill”).  As readers know, the Information Commissioner (ICO) is to be replaced by an Information Commission, and Schedule 13 outlines the procedural arrangements for the operation of the Commission. Schedule 13 is not “a gripping read”.  With all its provisions about voting, quorums, Committees, Board Members, Chairs and Chief Executives, the text can be described in two words: one is a swear word and the other is “boring”. H ..read more
Visit website

Follow Hawktalk on FeedSpot

Continue with Google
Continue with Apple
OR