The Legal Implications of Internet Marketing : Exploiting the Digital Marketplace Within the Boundaries of the Law

Au cours des dernières années, le domaine de la consommation a grandement évolué. Les agents de marketing ont commencé à utiliser l’Internet pour influencer les consommateurs en employant des tactiques originales et imaginatives qui ont rendus possible l’atteinte d'un niveau de communication interpersonnelle qui avait précédemment été insondable. Leurs interactions avec les consommateurs, en utilisant la technologie moderne, se manifeste sous plusieurs formes différentes qui sont toutes accompagnés de leur propre assortiment de problèmes juridiques. D’abord, il n'est pas rare pour les agents de marketing d’utiliser des outils qui leur permettent de suivre les actions des consommateurs dans le monde virtuel ainsi que dans le monde physique. Les renseignements personnels recueillis d'une telle manière sont souvent utilisés à des fins de publicité comportementale en ligne – une utilisation qui ne respecte pas toujours les limites du droit à la vie privée. Il est également devenu assez commun pour les agents de marketing d’utiliser les médias sociaux afin de converser avec les consommateurs. Ces forums ont aussi servi à la commission d’actes anticoncurrentiels, ainsi qu’à la diffusion de publicités fausses et trompeuses – deux pratiques qui sont interdites tant par la loi sur la concurrence que la loi sur la protection des consommateurs. Enfin, les agents de marketing utilisent diverses tactiques afin de joindre les consommateurs plus efficacement en utilisant diverses tactiques qui les rendent plus visible dans les moteurs de recherche sur Internet, dont certaines sont considérés comme malhonnêtes et pourraient présenter des problèmes dans les domaines du droit de la concurrence et du droit des marques de commerce. Ce mémoire offre une description détaillée des outils utilisés à des fins de marketing sur Internet, ainsi que de la manière dont ils sont utilisés. Il illustre par ailleurs les problèmes juridiques qui peuvent survenir à la suite de leur utilisation et définit le cadre législatif régissant l’utilisation de ces outils par les agents de marketing, pour enfin démontrer que les lois qui entrent en jeu dans de telles circonstances peuvent, en effet, se révéler bénéfiques pour ces derniers d'un point de vue économique.

Librarians as Advocates for Social Media Privacy

Librarians must continue their traditional roles as privacy rights activists and intellectual freedom upholders into the digital age, and across electronic information sources, including social media fora. Social media is quickly becoming a major source of information and center for information seeking, and librarians have an opportunity to promote and help shape social media policies that protect users’ privacy and assure that users can seek information without inhibition. One way librarians can be involved in the promotion of online privacy is by joining the social media user rights movement and advocating terms of use agreements that protect information seekers that follow the "Privacy by Design" model created by Ann Cavoukian, Ph.D.

Social Media, Privacy, and the Academic Classroom

We live in a world full of social media and portable technology that allows for the effortless access to, and sharing of, information. While this constant connection can be viewed as a benefit by some, there have been recent, sometimes embarrassing, instances throughout the world that show just how quickly any expectation of privacy can be destroyed. From pictures of poorly dressed shoppers at a grocery store to customers recording interactions with their servers at restaurants, the internet is full of media (all with the potential to go viral) created and posted without consent of all parties captured. This risk to privacy is not just limited to retail and restaurants, as being in any situation amongst people puts you at risk, including being in an academic classroom. Anyone providing in-class instruction, be they professor or librarian, can be at risk for this type of violation of privacy. In addition, the students in the class are also at risk for being unwittingly captured by their classmates. To combat this, colleges and universities are providing recommendations to faculty regarding this issue, such as including suggested syllabus statements about classroom recording by students. In some instances, colleges and universities have instituted formal policies with strict penalties for violators. An overview of current privacy law as it relates to an academic setting is discussed as well as recent, newsworthy instances of student recording in the classroom and the resulting controversies. Additionally, there is a discussion highlighting various recommendations and formal policies that have been issued and adopted by colleges and universities around the country. Finally, advice is offered about what librarians can do to educate students, faculty, and staff about the privacy rights of others and the potential harm that could come from posting to social media and the open web images and video of others without their consent.

The Feasibility of Applying EU Data Protection Law to Biological Materials: Challenging ‘Data’ as Exclusively Informational

Though controversial the question of applying data protection laws to biological materials has only gotten a little attention in data privacy discourse. This article aims to contribute to this dearth by arguing that despite absence of positive intention from the architects to apply the EU Data privacy law to biological materials, a range of developments in Molecular Biology and nano-technology—usually mediated by advances in ICT—may provide persuasive grounds to do so. In addition, paucity of sufficient explication of key terms like ‘data/information’ in these legislations may fuel such tendency whereby laws originally intended for the informational world may end up applying to the biological world. The article also analyzes various predicaments that may arise from applying data privacy laws to biological materials. A focus is made on legislative sources at the EU level though national laws are relied on when pertinent.

Legal Issues Relating to the Notification of Australian Data Breaches

Advances in information and communications technologies during the last two decades have allowed organisations to capture and utilise data on a vast scale, thus heightening the importance of adequate measures for protecting unauthorised disclosure of personal information. In this respect, data breach notification has emerged as an issue of increasing importance throughout the world. It has been the subject of law reform in the United States and in other international jurisdictions. Following the Australian Law Reform Commission’s review of privacy, data breach notification will soon be addressed in Australia. This article provides a review of US and Australian legal initiatives regarding the notification of data breaches. The authors highlight areas of concern based on the extant US literature that require specific consideration in Australia regarding the development of an Australian legal framework for the notification of data breaches.

Stakeholder perspectives regarding the mandatory notification of Australian data breaches

The advent of data breach notification laws in the United States (US) has unearthed a significant problem involving the mismanagement of personal information by a range of public and private sector organisations. At present, there is currently no statutory obligation under Australian law requiring public or private sector organisations to report a data breach of personal information to law enforcement agencies or affected persons. However, following a comprehensive review of Australian privacy law, the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) has recommended the introduction of a mandatory data breach notification scheme. The issue of data breach notification has ignited fierce debate amongst stakeholders, especially larger private sector entities. The purpose of this article is to document the perspectives of key industry and government representatives to identify their standpoints regarding an appropriate regulatory approach to data breach notification in Australia.

Australian data breach notification : avoiding the State/Federal overlap

Mandatory data breach notification has become a matter of increasing concern for law reformers. In Australia, this issue was recently addressed as part of a comprehensive review of privacy law conducted by the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) which recommended a uniform national regime for protecting personal information applicable to both the public and private sectors. As in all federal systems, the distribution of powers between central and state governments poses problems for national consistency. In the authors’ view, a uniform approach to mandatory data breach notification has greater merit than a ‘jurisdiction specific’ approach epitomized by US state-based laws. The US response has given rise to unnecessary overlaps and inefficiencies as demonstrated by a review of different notification triggers and encryption safe harbors. Reviewing the US response, the authors conclude that a uniform approach to data breach notification is inherently more efficient.

Legal issues related to Accountable-eHealth systems in Australia

Information privacy requirements of patients and information requirements of healthcare providers (HCP) are competing concerns. Reaching a balance between these requirements have proven difficult but is crucial for the success of eHealth systems. The traditional approaches to information management have been preventive measures which either allow or deny access to information. We believe that this approach is inappropriate for a domain such as healthcare. We contend that introducing information accountability (IA) to eHealth systems can reach the aforementioned balance without the need for rigid information control. IA is a fairly new concept to computer science, hence; there are no unambiguously accepted principles as yet. But the concept delivers promising advantages to information management in a robust manner. Accountable-eHealth (AeH) systems are eHealth systems which use IA principles as the measure for privacy and information management. AeH systems face three main impediments; technological, social and ethical and legal. In this paper, we present the AeH model and focus on the legal aspects of AeH systems in Australia. We investigate current legislation available in Australia regarding health information management and identify future legal requirements if AeH systems are to be implemented in Australia.

Crisis on impact : responding to cyber attacks on critical information infrastructures

In the developing digital economy, the notion of traditional attack on enterprises of national significance or interest has transcended into different modes of electronic attack, surpassing accepted traditional forms of physical attack upon a target. The terrorist attacks that took place in the United States on September 11, 2001 demonstrated the physical devastation that could occur if any nation were the target of a large-scale terrorist attack. Therefore, there is a need to protect criticalnational infrastructure and critical information infrastructure. In particular,this protection is crucial for the proper functioning of a modern society and for a government to fulfill one of its most important prerogatives – namely, the protection of its people. Computer networks have many benefits that governments, corporations, and individuals alike take advantage of in order to promote and perform their duties and roles. Today, there is almost complete dependence on private sector telecommunication infrastructures and the associated computer hardware and software systems.1 These infrastructures and systems even support government and defense activity.2 This Article discusses possible attacks on critical information infrastructures and the government reactions to these attacks.

Media futures: A review essay on'The Future of Reputation','TV Futures', and'The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It'

In his 1987 book, The Media Lab: Inventing the Future at MIT, Stewart Brand provides an insight into the visions of the future of the media in the 1970s and 1980s. 1 He notes that Nicolas Negroponte made a compelling case for the foundation of a media laboratory at MIT with diagrams detailing the convergence of three sectors of the media—the broadcast and motion picture industry; the print and publishing industry; and the computer industry. Stewart Brand commented: ‘If Negroponte was right and communications technologies really are converging, you would look for signs that technological homogenisation was dissolving old boundaries out of existence, and you would expect an explosion of new media where those boundaries used to be’. Two decades later, technology developers, media analysts and lawyers have become excited about the latest phase of media convergence. In 2006, the faddish Time Magazine heralded the arrival of various Web 2.0 social networking services: You can learn more about how Americans live just by looking at the backgrounds of YouTube videos—those rumpled bedrooms and toy‐strewn basement rec rooms—than you could from 1,000 hours of network television. And we didn’t just watch, we also worked. Like crazy. We made Facebook profiles and Second Life avatars and reviewed books at Amazon and recorded podcasts. We blogged about our candidates losing and wrote songs about getting dumped. We camcordered bombing runs and built open‐source software. America loves its solitary geniuses—its Einsteins, its Edisons, its Jobses—but those lonely dreamers may have to learn to play with others. Car companies are running open design contests. Reuters is carrying blog postings alongside its regular news feed. Microsoft is working overtime to fend off user‐created Linux. We’re looking at an explosion of productivity and innovation, and it’s just getting started, as millions of minds that would otherwise have drowned in obscurity get backhauled into the global intellectual economy. The magazine announced that Time’s Person of the Year was ‘You’, the everyman and everywoman consumer ‘for seizing the reins of the global media, for founding and framing the new digital democracy, for working for nothing and beating the pros at their own game’. This review essay considers three recent books, which have explored the legal dimensions of new media. In contrast to the unbridled exuberance of Time Magazine, this series of legal works displays an anxious trepidation about the legal ramifications associated with the rise of social networking services. In his tour de force, The Future of Reputation: Gossip, Rumor, and Privacy on the Internet, Daniel Solove considers the implications of social networking services, such as Facebook and YouTube, for the legal protection of reputation under privacy law and defamation law. Andrew Kenyon’s edited collection, TV Futures: Digital Television Policy in Australia, explores the intersection between media law and copyright law in the regulation of digital television and Internet videos. In The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It, Jonathan Zittrain explores the impact of ‘generative’ technologies and ‘tethered applications’—considering everything from the Apple Mac and the iPhone to the One Laptop per Child programme.

Indigenous Intellectual Property: A Handbook of Contemporary Research

Taking an interdisciplinary approach unmatched by any other book on this topic, this thoughtful Handbook considers the international struggle to provide for proper and just protection of Indigenous intellectual property (IP). In light of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2007, expert contributors assess the legal and policy controversies over Indigenous knowledge in the fields of international law, copyright law, trademark law, patent law, trade secrets law, and cultural heritage. The overarching discussion examines national developments in Indigenous IP in the United States, Canada, South Africa, the European Union, Australia, New Zealand, and Indonesia. The Handbook provides a comprehensive overview of the historical origins of conflict over Indigenous knowledge, and examines new challenges to Indigenous IP from emerging developments in information technology, biotechnology, and climate change. Practitioners and scholars in the field of IP will learn a great deal from this Handbook about the issues and challenges that surround just protection of a variety of forms of IP for Indigenous communities. Preface The Legacy of David Unaipon Matthew Rimmer Introduction: Mapping Indigenous Intellectual Property Matthew Rimmer PART I INTERNATIONAL LAW 1. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: A Human Rights Framework for Indigenous Intellectual Property Mauro Barelli 2. The WTO, The TRIPS Agreement and Traditional Knowledge Tania Voon 3. The World Intellectual Property Organization and Traditional Knowledge Sara Bannerman 4. The World Indigenous Network: Rio+20, Intellectual Property, Indigenous Knowledge, and Sustainable Development Matthew Rimmer PART II COPYRIGHT LAW AND RELATED RIGHTS 5. Government Man, Government Painting? David Malangi and the 1966 One-Dollar Note Stephen Gray 6. What Wandjuk Wanted Martin Hardie 7. Avatar Dreaming: Indigenous Cultural Protocols and Making Films Using Indigenous Content Terri Janke 8. The Australian Resale Royalty for Visual Artists: Indigenous Art and Social Justice Robert Dearn and Matthew Rimmer PART III TRADE MARK LAW AND RELATED RIGHTS 9. Indigenous Cultural Expression and Registered Designs Maree Sainsbury 10. The Indian Arts and Crafts Act: The Limits of Trademark Analogies Rebecca Tushnet 11. Protection of Traditional Cultural Expressions within the New Zealand Intellectual Property Framework: A Case Study of the Ka Mate Haka Sarah Rosanowski 12 Geographical Indications and Indigenous Intellectual Property William van Caenegem PART IV PATENT LAW AND RELATED RIGHTS 13. Pressuring ‘Suspect Orthodoxy’: Traditional Knowledge and the Patent System Chidi Oguamanam, 14. The Nagoya Protocol: Unfinished Business Remains Unfinished Achmad Gusman Siswandi 15. Legislating on Biopiracy in Europe: Too Little, too Late? Angela Daly 16. Intellectual Property, Indigenous Knowledge, and Climate Change Matthew Rimmer PART V PRIVACY LAW AND IDENTITY RIGHTS 17. Confidential Information and Anthropology: Indigenous Knowledge and the Digital Economy Sarah Holcombe 18. Indigenous Cultural Heritage in Australia: The Control of Living Heritages Judith Bannister 19. Dignity, Trust and Identity: Private Spheres and Indigenous Intellectual Property Bruce Baer Arnold 20. Racial Discrimination Laws as a Means of Protecting Collective Reputation and Identity David Rolph PART VI INDIGENOUS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: REGIONAL PERSPECTIVES 21. Diluted Control: A Critical Analysis of the WAI262 Report on Maori Traditional Knowledge and Culture Fleur Adcock 22. Traditional Knowledge Governance Challenges in Canada Jeremy de Beer and Daniel Dylan 23. Intellectual Property protection of Traditional Knowledge and Access to Knowledge in South Africa Caroline Ncube 24. Traditional Knowledge Sovereignty: The Fundamental Role of Customary Law in Protection of Traditional Knowledge Brendan Tobin Index

La protection de la vie privée : brève analyse de la situation italienne

L'Italie a été l'avant-dernier pays européen, suivi seulement de la Grèce, à se doter d'une loi sur la protection de la vie privée (loi du 31 décembre 1996). Paradoxalement, c'est en Italie qu'ont été écrites quelques-uns des meilleurs ouvrages sur ce sujet, notamment ceux du professeur Rodotà. En dépit du retard du législateur italien, il doit être précisé que la loi de 1996, faisant suite à la Directive communautaire relative à la protection des données personnelles, introduit un concept moderne de la vie privée, qui ne se limite pas simplement à un « right to be let alone », selon la célèbre conception de la fin du dix-neuvième siècle, mais qui se réfère plutôt à la protection de la personne humaine. Le concept de vie privée, entendu comme l’interdiction d’accéder à des informations personnelles, se transforme en un contrôle des renseignements relatifs à la personne. De cette manière, se développe une idée de la vie privée qui pose comme fondements : le droit de contrôle, de correction et d'annulation d'informations sur la personne. À cet égard, il est important de souligner le double système d’autorisation pour le traitement licite des informations. Le consentement de l'intéressé est requis pour les données personnelles. Pour les données dites « sensibles », en revanche, l'autorisation du Garant sera nécessaire en plus de l'expression du consentement de l’intéressé. En revanche, aucune autorisation n'est requise pour le traitement de données n'ayant qu'un but exclusivement personnel, ainsi que pour les données dites « anonymes », à condition qu'elles ne permettent pas d'identifier le sujet concerné. Le type de responsabilité civile prévu par la loi de 1996 se révèle particulièrement intéressant : l'article 18 prévoit l'application de l'article 2050 du Code civil italien (exercice d'activités dangereuses), alors que l'article 29 prévoit, lui, l'octroi de dommages et intérêts pour les préjudices non patrimoniaux (cette disposition est impérative, conformément à l'article 2059 du Code civil italien). Le présent article se propose d'examiner l'application des normes évoquées ci-dessus à Internet.

Forgetting, non-forgetting and quasi-forgetting in social networking

In this paper we analyze some of the practical realities around deleting personal data on social networks with respect to the Canadian regime of privacy protection. We first discuss the extent to which Canadian privacy law imposes access, deletion, and retention requirements on data brokers. After this discussion we turn to corporate organizational practices. Our analyses of social networking sites’ privacy policies reveal how poorly companies recognize the right to be have one’s personal information deleted in their existing privacy commitments and practices. Next, we turn to Law Enforcement Authorities (LEAs) and how their practices challenge the deletion requirements because of LEAs’ own capture, processing, and retention of social networking information. We conclude by identifying lessons from the Canadian experience and raising them against the intense transatlantic struggle over the scope of deletion of data stored in cloud-based computing infrastructures.

La protection de la vie privée au temps de la biosécurité

Cette thèse s’intéresse à la protection de la vie privée informationnelle dans le contexte de la biosécurité. La biosécurité se définit comme le processus qui vise à prendre en charge, dans une optique de sécurité nationale, les menaces et dangers que représentent les épidémies de maladies infectieuses pour la santé des populations humaines et la sécurité de l’État. Notre projet remet en question l’idée selon laquelle la conduite des activités de surveillance de la santé publique implique nécessairement une diminution de la protection offerte aux renseignements personnels sur la santé. Nos recherches tendent à démontrer que la conciliation de la surveillance de la santé et la protection de la vie privée est non seulement possible, mais qu’elle est surtout nécessaire. Nous portons plus précisément notre attention sur le cas de la collecte et de l’utilisation de renseignements dépersonnalisés sur la santé par les systèmes de surveillance syndromique. Bien calibrée et soigneusement réglementée, cette forme novatrice et particulière de surveillance offrirait le double avantage de réduire les risques d’atteintes à la vie privée des individus et d’augmenter de manière considérable l’efficacité des capacités étatiques en matière de détection des épidémies.

Henkilötietojen siirrot Euroopan unionista kolmansiin maihin erityisesti Euroopan unionin tuomioistuimen tuomion C-362/14 Maximillian Schrems v Data Protection Commissioner valossa

Tutkielman tarkoituksena on selvittää lukijalle, mistä syistä ja miten Euroopan unionin tietosuojainstrumentit – nykyinen tietosuojadirektiivi ja tuleva tietosuoja-asetus – asettavat rajoituksia EU:n kansalaisten henkilötietojen siirroille kolmansiin maihin kaupallisia tarkoituksia varten. Erityisen tarkastelun kohteena on henkilötietojen siirrot EU:n alueelta Yhdysvaltoihin mahdollistanut Safe Harbor-järjestelmä, jonka Euroopan unionin tuomioistuin katsoi pätemättömäksi asiassa C-362/14 Maximillian Schrems v Data Protection Commissioner. Tutkimusaiheen eli henkilötietojen rajat ylittävien siirtojen ollessa kansainvälisen oikeuden ja tietosuojaoikeuden leikkauspisteessä on tutkimuksessa käytetty molempien oikeudenalojen asiantuntijoiden tutkimuksia lähteenä. Kansainvälisen oikeuden peruslähteenä on käytetty Brownlien teosta Principles of Public International Law (6. painos), jota vasten on peilattu tutkimusaihetta tarkemmin käsittelevää kirjallisuutta. Erityisesti on syytä nostaa esille Bygraven tietosuojaoikeutta kansainvälisessä kontekstissa käsittelevä Data Privacy Law: An International Perspective sekä Kunerin nimenomaisesti henkilötietojen kansainvälisiä siirtoja käsittelevä Transborder Data Flows and Data Privacy Law. Uusien teknologioiden myötä nopeasti kehittyvästä tutkimusilmiöstä ja oikeudenalasta johtuen tutkimuksessa on käytetty lähdemateriaaleina runsaasti aihepiiriä käsitteleviä artikkeleita arvostetuista julkaisuista, sekä EU:n tietosuojaviranomaisten ja YK:n raportteja virallislähteinä. Keskeiset tutkimustulokset osoittavat EU:n ja sen jäsenvaltioiden intressit henkilötietojen siirroissa sekä EU:n asettamien henkilötietojen siirtosääntelyiden vaikutukset kolmansiin maihin. Globaalin konsensuksen saavuttamisen koskien henkilötietojen kansainvälisiä siirtosääntelyitä arvioitiin olevan ainakin lähitulevaisuudessa epätodennäköistä. Nykyisten alueellisten sääntelyratkaisujen osalta todettiin Euroopan neuvoston yleissopimuksen No. 108 eniten osoittavan potentiaalia maailmanlaajuiselle implementoinnille. Lopuksi arvioitiin oikeudellisen pluralismin mallin puitteissa tarkoituksenmukaisia keinoja EU:n kansalaisten perusoikeuksina turvattujen yksityisyyden ja henkilötietojen suojan parantamiseksi. Tarkastelu osoittaa EU:n kansalaisten sekä näiden henkilötietoja käsittelevien ja siirtävien yritysten välillä olleen tiedollinen ja voimallinen epätasapaino, joka ilmenee yksilön tiedollisen itseautonomian ja suostumuksen merkityksen heikentymisenä, joskin EU:n vuonna 2018 voimaan astuva tietosuoja-asetus organisaatioiden vastuuta korostamalla pyrkii poistamaan tätä ongelmaa.