Data Retention Directive considered harmful
On 8 apr 2014, at 11:09, Nick Hilliard <nick@inex.ie> wrote:
http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2014-04/cp140054en.p...
enjoy.
Exactly what both opponents and proponents of the directive wanted. This will be messy... Patrik
patrik, can you be more specific?¿ thanks! mariann On Apr 8, 2014, at 11:39 AM, Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> wrote:
On 8 apr 2014, at 11:09, Nick Hilliard <nick@inex.ie> wrote:
http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2014-04/cp140054en.p...
enjoy.
Exactly what both opponents and proponents of the directive wanted.
This will be messy...
Patrik
We should remember that the Directive is in reality an exception to the base rule that is that information MUST be deleted when it is not needed anymore. Neither the ones that want more data retained nor the ones that is against data to be retained like the Directive. Opening it can because of that be viewed as a success for both(!) sides. The ones being AGAINST the directive, they see an ability to make it more clear what is to be retained and not together with shortening the time data is retained (up to including "quick freeze"). The ones being IN FAVOR of the directive are happy because they see it being possible to include in the new version also other kinds of communication than what is in the directive today. Etc. Patrik On 8 apr 2014, at 12:24, mariann unterluggauer <mariann@nomatic.org> wrote:
patrik, can you be more specific?¿
thanks! mariann
On Apr 8, 2014, at 11:39 AM, Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> wrote:
On 8 apr 2014, at 11:09, Nick Hilliard <nick@inex.ie> wrote:
http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2014-04/cp140054en.p...
enjoy.
Exactly what both opponents and proponents of the directive wanted.
This will be messy...
Patrik
On 8 Apr, 2014, at 14:28, Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> wrote:
that information MUST be deleted when it is not needed anymore
Or maybe more: personal information should be deleted or anonymised when it is no longer required for the specific purpose the individual originally agreed too. So no long-term archiving and no re-use for non-related purposes. But yes. This will be messy. Even post-Snoden. And even if we see stories like this: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-26936116 On the bright side it could make implementing carrier-grade NATs so much more fun. Gordon See also: http://www.privacysurgeon.org/blog/incision/european-court-rules-mass-survei...
On 8 Apr 2014, at 15:17, Gordon Lennox <gordon.lennox.13@gmail.com> wrote:
On the bright side it could make implementing carrier-grade NATs so much more fun.
Or perhaps it'll be the tipping point for carriers to deploy IPv6. :-) Says he both ducking for cover and running away...
hi, patrik thanks! and in case of the "dreams aka visions" of jim and gordon: i would add "must delete", applied to all levels. stored as well as requested data. i mean, i am still able to go to a eu forensic institute today to see pictures of alphonse bertillon. yet, in the 19th century they had a sort of "must delete" law in place, which only was fulfilled in regard to sloppiness in the archive - - - or fire. mariann On Apr 8, 2014, at 5:18 PM, Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> wrote:
On 8 Apr 2014, at 15:17, Gordon Lennox <gordon.lennox.13@gmail.com> wrote:
On the bright side it could make implementing carrier-grade NATs so much more fun.
Or perhaps it'll be the tipping point for carriers to deploy IPv6. :-) Says he both ducking for cover and running away...
My 2 cents on the messy consequences upon nation al legislation. There is no automatic annulment of the national legislation on data retention, it is up to the member states to abrogate or modify their rules: http://radiobruxelleslibera.wordpress.com/2014/04/08/the-annulment-of-the-da... ----------------------------------------- Innocenzo Genna Genna Cabinet Sprl 1050 Bruxelles - Belgium Skype: innonews Twitter: @InnoGenna Email: inno@innogenna.it my blog:http://radiobruxelleslibera.wordpress.com/ my music: www.innocenzogenna.com Il giorno 08/apr/2014, alle ore 11:09, Nick Hilliard <nick@inex.ie> ha scritto:
http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2014-04/cp140054en.p...
enjoy.
Nick
On 08/04/2014 12:47, Innocenzo Genna wrote:
My 2 cents on the messy consequences upon nation al legislation.
There is no automatic annulment of the national legislation on data retention, it is up to the member states to abrogate or modify their rules:
Yes, but it creates an immediate long term problem for all of the national legislation and leaves it all open to be contested in the courts. In the case of Ireland, it would be extraordinary for the High Court to dismiss the opinions of the ECJ, particularly as they believed there was sufficient grounds to refer the original Digital Rights Ireland complaint to the ECJ in the first place. It will be interesting to see the final ruling. Nick
yes, I agree on the wave of uncertainty starting from eh ECJ decision, but we cannot do against: the annulment decision of the ECJ does not affect directly the transposing national legislations. The national legislation become ineffective (not void!) as far as they contravene the principles laid down by the ECJ, and this is an evaluation to be made on a case by case basis. Do not forget: the ECJ DID NOT declare that data retention is per se incompatible with EU law. By contrast, ECJ annulled the directive because the way data retention was imposed was not justified. It follows from that thatathat a national legislation may survive as long as it fit the ECJ principles. I assume that most of the national data retention legislation do not fit the principles laid down by the ECJ ruling. Unless the local government or parliament take a prompt initiative (repealing or modifying that legislation), this matter remains uncertain: whether such legislation are not effective any longer, this is a matter to be declared by a national courts. A plenty of scenarios can emerge: - consumers using ISPs because they retian their data in violation of privacy law; - people challenging public authorities taking actions against them on the basis of data retained on the basis of the annulled directive - ISP sued by publci authoriuties because they do not retina data any longer and so on…. By the way, the last news from the wise Nordic countries Telenor, Tele2 in Sweden to delete retained customer data Tuesday 15 April 2014 | 12:16 CET | News Telenor's Swedish unit Bredbandsbolaget and Tele2 Sweden announced separately that they have stopped storing customer data, after the European Court of Justice recently declared the EU Data Protection Directive invalid. Both operators said they would start erasing customer information that they have already saved. Tele2 said it has come to the conclusion that continuing to keep the data would be illegal. It said that it looks forward to discussions with the justice department and other authorities on how it can continue to support law enforcement agencies without compromising its customers' privacy. ----------------------------------------- Innocenzo Genna Genna Cabinet Sprl 1050 Bruxelles - Belgium Skype: innonews Twitter: @InnoGenna Email: inno@innogenna.it my blog:http://radiobruxelleslibera.wordpress.com/ my music: www.innocenzogenna.com Il giorno 14/apr/2014, alle ore 15:10, Nick Hilliard <nick@inex.ie> ha scritto:
On 08/04/2014 12:47, Innocenzo Genna wrote:
My 2 cents on the messy consequences upon nation al legislation.
There is no automatic annulment of the national legislation on data retention, it is up to the member states to abrogate or modify their rules:
Yes, but it creates an immediate long term problem for all of the national legislation and leaves it all open to be contested in the courts. In the case of Ireland, it would be extraordinary for the High Court to dismiss the opinions of the ECJ, particularly as they believed there was sufficient grounds to refer the original Digital Rights Ireland complaint to the ECJ in the first place. It will be interesting to see the final ruling.
Nick
(sorry for the various typos, the mail was sent before revising it, however the substance is correct) ----------------------------------------- Innocenzo Genna Genna Cabinet Sprl 1050 Bruxelles - Belgium Skype: innonews Twitter: @InnoGenna Email: inno@innogenna.it my blog:http://radiobruxelleslibera.wordpress.com/ my music: www.innocenzogenna.com Il giorno 15/apr/2014, alle ore 12:51, Innocenzo Genna <inno@innogenna.it> ha scritto:
yes, I agree on the wave of uncertainty starting from eh ECJ decision, but we cannot do against: the annulment decision of the ECJ does not affect directly the transposing national legislations. The national legislation become ineffective (not void!) as far as they contravene the principles laid down by the ECJ, and this is an evaluation to be made on a case by case basis. Do not forget: the ECJ DID NOT declare that data retention is per se incompatible with EU law. By contrast, ECJ annulled the directive because the way data retention was imposed was not justified. It follows from that thatathat a national legislation may survive as long as it fit the ECJ principles.
I assume that most of the national data retention legislation do not fit the principles laid down by the ECJ ruling. Unless the local government or parliament take a prompt initiative (repealing or modifying that legislation), this matter remains uncertain: whether such legislation are not effective any longer, this is a matter to be declared by a national courts. A plenty of scenarios can emerge:
- consumers using ISPs because they retian their data in violation of privacy law; - people challenging public authorities taking actions against them on the basis of data retained on the basis of the annulled directive - ISP sued by publci authoriuties because they do not retina data any longer
and so on….
By the way, the last news from the wise Nordic countries
Telenor, Tele2 in Sweden to delete retained customer data Tuesday 15 April 2014 | 12:16 CET | News Telenor's Swedish unit Bredbandsbolaget and Tele2 Sweden announced separately that they have stopped storing customer data, after the European Court of Justice recently declared the EU Data Protection Directive invalid. Both operators said they would start erasing customer information that they have already saved. Tele2 said it has come to the conclusion that continuing to keep the data would be illegal. It said that it looks forward to discussions with the justice department and other authorities on how it can continue to support law enforcement agencies without compromising its customers' privacy.
----------------------------------------- Innocenzo Genna Genna Cabinet Sprl 1050 Bruxelles - Belgium
Skype: innonews Twitter: @InnoGenna Email: inno@innogenna.it
my blog:http://radiobruxelleslibera.wordpress.com/ my music: www.innocenzogenna.com
Il giorno 14/apr/2014, alle ore 15:10, Nick Hilliard <nick@inex.ie> ha scritto:
On 08/04/2014 12:47, Innocenzo Genna wrote:
My 2 cents on the messy consequences upon nation al legislation.
There is no automatic annulment of the national legislation on data retention, it is up to the member states to abrogate or modify their rules:
Yes, but it creates an immediate long term problem for all of the national legislation and leaves it all open to be contested in the courts. In the case of Ireland, it would be extraordinary for the High Court to dismiss the opinions of the ECJ, particularly as they believed there was sufficient grounds to refer the original Digital Rights Ireland complaint to the ECJ in the first place. It will be interesting to see the final ruling.
Nick
participants (6)
-
Gordon Lennox -
Innocenzo Genna -
Jim Reid -
mariann unterluggauer -
Nick Hilliard -
Patrik Fältström