|
|
|
| What does the Information Commissioner's Office actually do? |
| Monday, April 13, 2009 at 13:06 by Mark Benson |
The Information Commissioner's Office has this weekend confirmed that Google Street View does not violate any privacy laws in the UK and is perfectly legal. When you consider the same ruling was applied to the Phorm targeted advertising system, which monitors website usage and websites visited, what exactly does the Information Commissioner's Office do?
There are concerns that many websites and many Internet services are using potential loopholes in privacy laws in the UK to harvest information which traditionally would have been seen as private. We have already seen situations whereby criminals have used Google Street View to find targets and plan escape routes and the Phorm saga continues with pro-Phorm and anti-Phorm parties further apart than ever before.
It does beg the question as to what information about yourself, your home and your Internet use is private and what is actually within the public domain. Even though these two systems have grabbed the headlines over the last few weeks there are many more similar systems out there which are operating using loopholes in the law.
How ironic that a Google Street View car driver was seen arguing with photographers who took their photograph while they were recording street data. |
|
| |
 
|
|
| "What does the Information Commissioner's Office actually do?" - Absolutely nothing! Just try complaining to them about, well, anything they are supposed to handle complaints about, and see how far you get! They are a complete and utter waste of space- even when compared with other feeble"regulators" such as the FSA and PhonepayPlus |
|
|
| The difference between Phorm and StreetView is that if I my car or my house appear on Street View it is because they are already in a public place and can be observed by any member of the public who is out there. But if I sit inside my house in a private place and use my computer I would not like anyone coming into my home looking over my shoulder and noting down what i do without my permission. If a real person did that it would be trespass at least. Phorm is virtual trespass unless I have given positive permission for each occasion and I have a full and clear understanding of what is tracked, what it is used for and how the data is stored. In practice I would say NO. |
|
|
| The main problem's with ICO are lack of powers and lack of IT expertise - and a lack of willingness to talk to privacy campaigners - commecial companies are able to access them quite easily but not members of the public. It has taken a year for anti-Phorm campaigners to get access to ICO and according to our understanding, ICO have never taken independent technical advice about Phorm - Webwise - Smartweb - PageSense. It seems they simply listened to BT and Phorm and believed what they were told. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
