Cyberlaw

TP025552

Cyberlaw Individual Assignment

Name: Choo Li Xiang
Student ID: TP025552
Intake: UC3F1402IT (BIS)
Lecturer: Miss Nooraneda Mutalib Laidey

Cyberlaw

TP025552

Contents
The Realm of Data Privacy..................................................................................................3
Data privacy and Protection in the Digital Domain.............................................................7
Balance between Communication and the Need for Law Enforcement Agencies..............8
Arguments on Data Privacy.................................................................................................9
Conclusion...........................................................................................................................9
References..........................................................................................................................10

Cyberlaw

TP025552

The Realm of Data Privacy

Trevor, Robert Hasty et al. (2009) observe that, data privacy, or else information privacy,
is the facet of information technology dealing with the ability of a business or person has
to decide what data in a computer system can be shared with third parties. The daunting
task in data privacy is to divide up data while safe-guarding individually identifiable
information. The meadows of data security and information security devise and make use
of software, hardware and human resources to address this issue. Given that the laws and
regulations related to data safety are persistently changing, it is imperative to keep
shoulder to shoulder of any changes in the law and frequently re-examine the conformity
with data privacy and security regulations.
Information about a peoples financial dealings, as well as the quantity of assets, shares
held in stocks or funds, outstanding debts, and acquisitions can be susceptible. If
criminals gain right of entry to information such as an individuals accounts or credit card
numbers, that personality could become the casualty of scam or identity larceny. In some
instances, businesses might be inclined to use this information to target individuals with
marketing personalized towards those individuals personal inclinations, something
which that person may or may not consent.
Bainbridge (2002) notes that, in the United States, legislation relating to data
confidentiality has been enacted in a sectorial manner, which implies that each law or
conformity regulation has been created in response to the requirements of a particular
industry or section of the populace. A case in point is like; the Childrens Online Privacy
Safety Act (COPSA), which empowers the parents the command on what information
websites can collect from their kids. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability
Act; This Act guarantees patient confidentiality for all healthcare-associated information.
Electronic Communications Privacy Act, which enlarges government precincts on wire
taps to include transmissions of electronic data. There is also Video Privacy Protection
Act which averts unjust disclosure of a persons individually identifiable information
arising from their rental or acquisition of audiovisual material.
Historically, according to Strobl, Judith, Cave et al. (2008), Chinese data privacy laws
have been seen as complicated and to some extent indistinguishable. Data security is
3

Cyberlaw

TP025552

fundamental concern in the Peoples Republic of China which has seen a flurry of related
legislative activity in recent years. This was started off by the unveiling of the Resolution
on Strengthening Internet Information safety by the Standing Committee of National
Peoples Congress in December 2012, and was immediately validated and put into
practice. Even though the eleven wide-ranging principle Articles summarized by the
Resolution are not in the form of law, they are compulsory and they lay down the
cornerstone for auxiliary expansion of the Chinese data protection system. The
Resolution forms the basis for the government to generate more comprehensive
administrative rules and, as foreseen, since the Resolution was set up, quite a lot of new
regulations have been established which attach more essence to the legal structure on data
protection in China.
The Data Safety Act 1998 came into practice on 1 March 2000 in the United Kingdom to
make it in tandem with a European Community Human Rights directive and to achieve a
common standard of safety across the Community, Bainbridge (2002). The rationale of
the new Act is to protect the individual rights and freedoms of persons particularly their
right to confidentiality with regard to the processing of personal data. The UK Data
Safety Act 1998 concerns the personal data despite the fact that it is held on a computer
structure or a piece of paper and there are particularly severe rules surrounding specific
sensitive data. These comprise the matters relating to healthiness, sexual life, spiritual
beliefs, political views, ethnic background, trade unification membership and scandalous
offences. Information relating to a company is not sheltered by this law.

The Act

requires that data are processed in respect of certain doctrines and conditions. Special
concern must be exercised with esteem to Personal Data and especially if it is receptive
data and the rule of Consent by the person must be observed. Personal data can only be
processed only if a person has given authority; if the data is an element of a contract; if
the data is a lawful obligation; if the data is essential to protect the individual; if it is in
the justifiable interests of the data controller.

Cyberlaw

TP025552

In India, a nation with highest saturation of mobile cell phones, Internet, and societal
networking, not many are grateful for the significance of data privacy, let alone celebrate
the day. The set of laws on privacy are not yet all-inclusive, and whereas the businesses
are strengthening data confidentiality conformity driven by market and regulatory
requirements, the understanding among general public are still low. Until a few decades
ago privacy would have been protected even in the absence of regulations merely by the
prohibitive cost and burden of information dispensation involved, thereby creating a
foundation for confidentiality violation, (Carey, Peter, 1998). Most information was
paper-work and those that were electronic were in incongruent systems. There was no
Internet, or systems that in a moment can capture, upload and broadcast a secretly shot
video clip to millions of people across the world. However, now with digital convergence
and flawless flow of information between devices, chances for exploitation of
information causing a privacy breach has not only augmented diverse, but has turned out
to be a threat for even a common man. India with one of the largest consumer foundation,
outsourcing business and growing wealth will only bring more technology in the hands of
people and the need for privacy will only increase. In India, the right to privacy has been
widely interpreted to be preserved in article 21 of its constitution. Confidential Rules
publicized as part of section 43A of Information Technology Act in April 2011 did bring
in directives, but this is not sufficiently comprehensive.
Meanwhile in Germany, there are a variety of different authorities that are accountable
for making certain that data protection laws and regulations are obeyed. Data protection
administration in the private sector comes under the accountability of the States.
Nevertheless, there is one exemption to the telecommunications and postal services
corporations. Those firms are scrutinized by the federal government which has allocated
that task to the Federal Data Protection Commissioner. In most States data privacy
scrutiny is carried out by the Data Protection Commissioners, for instance, in North
Rhine Westphalia. A commerce corporation is taken charge of by the authority that has
authority over the district where the company has its headquarters.

Cyberlaw

TP025552

Carey, Peter (1998) says that, by distant the most important part of administrative
responsibilities and activities are performed at state level, and supervision of conformity
with data protection necessities is a state government responsibility. This task has been
allocated to independent supervisory authorities, i.e. the data safety officers. The State
officer for Data Protection is in charge for supervision over the states public authorities
and organizations counting local government authorities. Moreover, Germany does not
acknowledge the Safe Harbor rules just like other EU states. It necessitates that all parties
concerned in data transfer to guarantee that Safe Harbor necessities are met in a more
dignified and structured approach. This is vital for German-based commerce using United
States cloud service providers given that the providers must take extra precautions to
make certain compliance. In adding together to the Federal Data Security Act, mechanism
of the German criminal code regulates personal data protection, specifically for
healthcare, insurance, and telecommunications companies. Each of the 16 German states
have their own specific data protection laws concerning to the same facets.

Cyberlaw

TP025552

Data privacy and Protection in the Digital

Domain
Bergstein, Brian (2006) argues that the Internet terrorizes privacy in various dimensions,
moderately because it is possible to record everything that you do on line, partly through
Internet Protocol addresses. The government of Australia and the Unite States and other
nations often keep an eye on electronic communication as do commercial companies like
Microsoft, and Google. Google scrutinizes all its searches and Microsoft, principally by
use of its Hotmail system, scrutinizes a huge deal of the global email traffic. There is also
a growing tendency for business enterprises to scrutinize their employees email and web
searching practices as well as scrutinize their personnel using cameras and other such
devices.
Two of the largest electronic surveillance initiatives originate in the US; a leader in the
strategies of surveillance. The primary one is the Echelon system which is managed by
the National Security Agency of the United States. It cited as proficient of capturing and
decrypting approximately any electronic message sent wherever in the world by means of
satellite. And Echelon has come under strong condemnation, particularly from the
European Union who have accused the US of putting into practice the Echelon system to
spy on European corporation to achieve commercial advantage for United States
corporations of which and Echelon is cited to function in Australia through the United
Statess Pine Gap facility. The other electronic surveillance device is referred to as
Carnivore and is used by the United States FBI to scrutinize selective e-mail messages
and other Internet interchange. The challengers of this system claim that the FBI should
get a court order before they tap anybodys email, as they need to with the telephone.

Cyberlaw

TP025552

Balance between Communication and the Need

for Law Enforcement Agencies
The continuing worldwide revolution in communications technology is fundamentally
changing the way people conduct their business and personal lives. These changes are
generating confrontations for both privacy and law enforcement interests, elongating the
limits of existing legal policy (Bergstein, Brian, 2006). Ensuring the appropriate balance
between privacy and law enforcement in the electronic empire has always been a
complex undertaking. Modifications in communications technology have necessitated
intermittent reassessment of privacy protections and law enforcement capabilities. It is
good time again for a fresh review.
A first step toward examining Electronic Communications Privacy Act Electronic
Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) would be to assess how the rules it set for
governmental access to e-mail and other computer communications are working.
Regrettably, there is no publicly available data on which to base such an assessment. This
deficiency should be corrected by amending ECPA to oblige that courts and prosecutors
submit reports on orders sought and granted for electronic communication access. Until
such a change can be ratified, Congressional committees should work out their oversight
authority to obtain such data from the federal agencies and the major service providers.

Cyberlaw

TP025552

Arguments on Data Privacy

In different ways, the encryption discussion has been a dispute between two rival phases
of safety (Strobl, Judith, Cave et al. (2008). In one phase, persons, enterprises and
governments prefer from a variety of encryption alternatives to safe-guard their security,
and another in which the federal government assumes the primary accountability for
defending private and business and governmental security through government promoted
weaknesses in encryption technology.

While the technology flabbergast, it is still

nascent, with little or no regulation adjoining its application. Queries of data privacy,
information ethics and data ownership thrive for users, however, little has been done to
control or avoid them. The emergence of big data analytics has blocked the line even
more. The advancements in technology have elevated security, tenure and privacy
queries, not just for customers, but also for enterprises using analytics to serve customers.
Regardless of the advances, data privacy policies are still sensitive subjects; queries about
these topics tend to draw little or no response.

Conclusion
Given that the laws and regulations related to data safety are persistently changing, it is
imperative to keep shoulder to shoulder of any changes in the law and frequently reexamine the conformity with data privacy and security regulations. The major concern of
data privacy in most countries arises from the matters relating to healthcare, financial
transactions, insurance, and telecommunications. Data protection policies heavily target
these areas as they are the most vulnerable to interference. Data and interactions privacy
is a foundation constitutional rule, and electronic communications needs to be protected
using strong privacy legislation. Data security should be an imperative area of interest for
every enterprise.

Cyberlaw

TP025552

References

Bainbridge, D. (2002). Data Security and Privacy, Rules and Legislation, Oxfd
University Press

Bergstein, Brian (2006; 6-18). Data mining and protection; Data privacy
Research, USA

Carey, Peter (1998). A handbook on Data Protection Act; Schuler Presses.

Strobl, Judith, Cave et al. (2008). Data protection law: Assessment and
Challenges to research British Medical Journal- BMJ.

Trevor W. Robert Hasty, et al. (2009). Data Protection Legislation in USA;

Advocates for Global Data Development

10