16.08.2010

Technology-specific guidance on the application of the model UPPs

10.49 In IP 31, the ALRC asked whether the privacy principles should be amended to deal with the impact of developing technology on privacy.[63] In DP 72, the ALRC expressed the view that these issues should not be covered in the model UPPs, but instead could form the subject of technology-specific guidance. 10.50 As noted …

Publications

Read more
16.08.2010

Mandating standards?

10.100 The term ‘standardisation’ can be used to refer to consistency and interoperability between technical systems. Standards also require compliance with certain specifications and procedures that are intended to result in appropriate levels of safety, privacy or security.[136]10.101 Local and international bodies are continuing to develop standards on privacy and security issues such as identification, …

Publications

Read more
16.08.2010

Technology-related amendments to the Privacy Act

10.114 This section focuses on the amendments to the Privacy Act that the ALRC recommends to ensure that the Act remains technology aware. In this section, recommended content of the model UPPs and the definitions relevant to technology are discussed. The model UPPs10.115 The model UPPs are intended to regulate personal information throughout the information-handling …

Publications

Read more
16.08.2010

Should the Privacy Act be technology neutral?

10.3 The explanatory memorandum to the Privacy Amendment (Private Sector) Bill 2000 noted that the National Privacy Principles (NPPs) were intended to be technology neutral. Technology-neutral privacy principles were intended to ensure that the Privacy Act remained flexible and relevant in the case of technological change.[1] In Chapter 9, the ALRC considers the impact on …

Publications

Read more
16.08.2010

Surveillance technologies

9.89 Surveillance involves the monitoring of a person, place or object to obtain certain information or to alter or control the behaviour of the subject of the surveillance.[188] Surveillance can be covert or overt, and can be conducted by a variety of individuals, agencies or organisations for different reasons. For example, surveillance can be conducted …

Publications

Read more
16.08.2010

Introduction

9.1 Developments in technology have always influenced discussions about privacy and the formation of information privacy laws. The first modern academic discussion of privacy in 1890[1] was prompted by concerns about the impact of new technologies on privacy, in particular ‘instantaneous photography’.[2] In 1983, concerns about dangers to privacy, including developments in information technology and …

Publications

Read more
16.08.2010

Introduction

8.1 Paul Roth has noted that:It is normally accepted that in law, deceased persons have no privacy interests. This is presumably on the basis that the raison d’être for privacy protection no longer exists, since dead people can feel no shame or humiliation. The underlying common law principle here is much the same as in …

Publications

Read more
16.08.2010

Issues Paper 31

8.23 In Issues Paper 31, Review of Privacy (IP 31), the ALRC asked whether the definition of ‘personal information’ in the Privacy Act should be amended to include the personal information of deceased individuals.[32]Submissions and consultations8.24 There was significant support expressed in submissions and consultations in response to IP 31 for extending at least some …

Publications

Read more
16.08.2010

Discussion Paper proposals

A new part in the Privacy Act8.34 In DP 72, the ALRC expressed the preliminary view that simply amending the definition of ‘personal information’ to include the personal information of deceased individuals would be problematic. In particular, many of the privacy principles could not apply at all, or could apply only in part, to such …

Publications

Read more
16.08.2010

Extension of the Privacy Act to groups?

7.8 In light of the above, the ALRC asked in the Issues Paper, Review of Privacy (IP 31), whether the Act should be amended to accommodate a ‘collective’ or ‘group’ right to privacy. The ALRC noted that there is some precedent for explicit privacy protection at common law for Indigenous groups in Australia.[12] Northern Territory …

Publications

Read more