{"title":"Brace! Brace! Brace! The Wave of Incoming CJEU Decisions","authors":"Tanguy Van Overstraeten, Richard Cumbley","doi":"10.54648/gplr2022026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/gplr2022026","url":null,"abstract":"This article considers the large number of pending decisions on data protection matters in front of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The CJEU places great weight on protecting the rights of individuals and has not shied away from decisions that create significant practical difficulties for businesses. Businesses operating in the European Union should therefore brace for significant change ahead. The article also considers the extent to which the courts of the United Kingdom will continue to follow decisions of the CJEU.\u0000GDPR, Court of Justice, Brexit, Data Protection, CJEU","PeriodicalId":127582,"journal":{"name":"Global Privacy Law Review","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129930109","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Legal Development for Privacy and Data Protection in Bangladesh","authors":"M. Islam","doi":"10.54648/gplr2022025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/gplr2022025","url":null,"abstract":"The growing advancement and dependence on the internet of things (IoT) beget the notion of ‘digitalization’, a widely used phenomenon in contemporary Bangladesh. The phrase ‘Digital Bangladesh’ was first pronounced by Bangladesh Awami League (BAL) in 2008 as a promise of the Election Manifesto. With ‘Digital Bangladesh’, BAL aimed at establishing a corruption and poverty-free knowledge-based society by employing information and communications technology (ICT). Accordingly, the Bangladesh government undertook numerous ICT-friendly initiatives, and eventually, the usage and dependence on ICT became rampant in Bangladesh and increased exceedingly during the COVID-19 period. This digital landscape makes life easier, faster, and smarter but poses tremendous privacy challenges. As in all digital communications, many actors collect, store, and share our valuable personal data with third parties, mostly without our knowledge. In response, states are generally emphasizing the enactment of omnibus data privacy legislation, but Bangladesh is lagging. This background impels the current researcher to search for answers to two vital questions – whether there is any legal development for the protection of privacy in Bangladesh, and whether the existing privacy-protective measures are adequate compared to relevant global standards. Such kind of research work is lacking, and hence, this study aims to fill that gap using doctrinal legal research methodology. The research outputs will enlighten all stakeholders in understanding the current legal development for privacy in Bangladesh and facilitate them to map their future policies and strategies accordingly.\u0000Bangladesh, Data Protection, Privacy","PeriodicalId":127582,"journal":{"name":"Global Privacy Law Review","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131061883","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Post-Pandemic Telehealth: An Unhealthy Privacy Prescription","authors":"Sultan-Mahmood Seraj","doi":"10.54648/gplr2022024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/gplr2022024","url":null,"abstract":"The COVID-19 pandemic catapulted the use of telehealth services across the United States (US). In response to the public health emergency, the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) at the US Department for Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a notice relaxing privacy and security safeguards outlined in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). During the past two years, several novel legal issues have arisen due to these lenient standards. The US government has not adequately considered standardizing rules for remote telehealth consultations and regulating the flow of sensitive patient data in a post-COVID world. This article addresses key legal issues associated with telehealth services while recommending national standards to mitigate physician liability while prioritizing patient care.","PeriodicalId":127582,"journal":{"name":"Global Privacy Law Review","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115554403","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Case Note: People v. Buza","authors":"Athanasios Kolovos, J. K. Brewer","doi":"10.54648/gplr2022027","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/gplr2022027","url":null,"abstract":"This case note discusses People v. Buza, the US State and federal Constitutional issues that it raises, and the potential societal impact from an ethical standpoint. Specifically, this case involving DNA collection of California arrestees raises issues as to the Fourth Amendment which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. The note also examines Buza's progeny which, aside from the DNA collection itself, raises privacy concerns as to the uploading of actual DNA profiles to a common database. Ethical concerns raised include future societal constructions of social class and genetic engineering. The note concludes that the judiciary is lax in its interpretation of cases involving DNA as technological advancements continue to hurdle forward.\u0000Privacy, DNA Profile, Fourth Amendment, DNA Identification, Genetic Engineering","PeriodicalId":127582,"journal":{"name":"Global Privacy Law Review","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126080592","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Missing (in) Action: Where Are the Australian Data Breach Class Actions?","authors":"Sophie Dawson, E. Croft","doi":"10.54648/gplr2022019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/gplr2022019","url":null,"abstract":"Data breach class actions have been a feature of the privacy landscape in the US and UK since as early as 2002. While Australia has experienced a surge in regulatory actions brought in respect of data breaches, we have yet to see an uptick in consumer actions in Australia. An action was brought in 2018, however it settled prior to receiving judicial consideration.\u0000This article provides some examples of the difficulties of bringing such actions in Australia, both at a substantive and procedural law level. \u0000We also highlight some proposed upcoming legislative changes which may have an impact in this space, including the proposed introduction of a tort of privacy and direct right of action in respect of interferences with privacy under the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) (Privacy Act).\u0000Privacy, Data, Breach, Cybersecurity, Australia, Litigation, Court, Class Action, Reform","PeriodicalId":127582,"journal":{"name":"Global Privacy Law Review","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115134572","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Some Problems of ‘Consent’ Under Australian Data Privacy Law","authors":"David Lindsay","doi":"10.54648/gplr2022013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/gplr2022013","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":127582,"journal":{"name":"Global Privacy Law Review","volume":"72 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128018371","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Lloyd v. Google LLC, and How Australia Is Tackling Privacy and Data Breach Litigation","authors":"Amy Cooper-Boast, Brooke Hall-Carney","doi":"10.54648/gplr2022020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/gplr2022020","url":null,"abstract":"The much-anticipated judgment of the UK Supreme Court in Lloyd v. Google LLC [2021] UKSC 50; [2021] 3 WLR 1268 was handed down in November 2021. The decision challenges the notion that one’s data and its loss of control has an inherent value which is actionable in its own right. It is welcomed by Big Tech, other organizations that control data, and their insurers. The decision is a key case in the broader landscape of accountability of technology companies and is indicative of the disparity in data protection and privacy rights across different jurisdictions. This case note examines the key points arising from the case, and the comparable landscape for privacy and data breach litigation in Australia.\u0000Lloyd v. Google, Google, Privacy, Data Breach, Data Protection, Litigation, Australia, United Kingdom, Class Action","PeriodicalId":127582,"journal":{"name":"Global Privacy Law Review","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114799296","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Information Privacy and Consent in Australia","authors":"Ceyhun Necati Pehlivan","doi":"10.54648/gplr2022012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/gplr2022012","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":127582,"journal":{"name":"Global Privacy Law Review","volume":"2014 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132221584","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"We, the Robots? Regulating Artificial Intelligence and the Limits of the Law, Simon Chesterman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2021","authors":"Iana Kazeeva","doi":"10.54648/gplr2022021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/gplr2022021","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":127582,"journal":{"name":"Global Privacy Law Review","volume":"150 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124195088","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
