As the Estonian Presidency of the Council of the European Union wraps up this month, it put forward a new draft of the pending ePrivacy Regulation , which was considered at the Council’s WP TELE meeting held Dec. 11. While it is a new consolidated draft, with many deviations from the initial Commission draft throughout, the new pieces for consideration in this draft are limited to articles 6 through 8, which concern the legitimate bases for processing electronic communications and metadata, plus rules around the retention, storage, and deletion of user data. The stated purpose of this most recent meeting was to consider these modifications to articles 6 through 8 and then begin discussion of Article 10, which regards the provision of privacy settings in apps and communications software.
Until 1989, Germany was a divided country. East Germany was under communist rule. The powerbase of the communist government was its secret service – the infamous “Staatssicherheit,” also known as the Stasi. As a West German, I knew that the Stasi was likely to open the envelope when I sent a letter to my friends in the east part of Berlin. I also knew that the Stasi was likely to listen in when I called, so we were careful not to talk politics (or the music tapes I would smuggle across the border on my next visit) on the phone.
The EU General Data Protection Regulation has been a front-and-center issue for privacy pros and businesses for time time now, but major regulatory issues appear to be just getting started. That was made clear Thursday at the IAPP Europe Data Protection Congress by German MEP Birgit Sippel during her first public speech as the European Parliament’s Special Rapporteur for the proposed ePrivacy Regulation. “Would you allow a stranger to go into your bedroom or look through your drawers without your permission?” she asked. “No, you probably wouldn’t.” The same concept, she added, should apply to the online world.Â With former MEP and Special Rapporter Marju Lauristin winning an election for her local council in Estonia, Sippel now takes the reigns of what has already become a heated and controversial proposed regulation of the telecommunications industry.
The European Parliament has approved the amended text of the EU ePrivacy Regulation, a.k.a. the Lauristin Report. What you should know.
What would life be like without smartphones? Hard to imagine in 2017. The European ePrivacy Regulation being debated in the European Parliament might make a difference. A study I prepared for the Centre for Information Policy Leadership shows the flaws of the ePrivacy draft.
Members of the European Parliament’s civil liberties committee handed privacy and data protection advocates a big win Thursday when they put Rapporteur Marju Lauristin’s proposals on the ePrivacy Regulation to the vote. The MEPs approved Lauristin’s report 31 to 25 and granted a mandate for further negotiations. It’s a hugely significant piece of legislation that will impact data protection landscape for decades to come.
On October 19, 2017, the European Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs narrowly voted to approve an amended version of the e-Privacy Regulation. The committee vote is an important step in the process within the European Parliament.
Electronic devices are no longer a luxury; for most, electronic devices are imperative for daily tasks. We rely on digital technologies to simplify and generate information on transportation schedules, exact location or allow us to video chat with friends and family; perhaps rate and recommend local attractions or restaurants to other users.
In new data-driven world, the mobile industry is focused on building the trust and confidence of users and, in so doing, enabling data innovation that benefits citizens. However, this will hinge on the implementation of consistent and balanced rules for data privacy.
The big vote on the ePrivacy Regulation in the European Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs will be delayed by at least a week. Originally scheduled for Oct. 12, agreement among MEPs on the text has been difficult to reach.