The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – the new data protection law that applies to every organisation that handles the data of European citizens – has now entered the two year grace period for businesses to comply. This means that all firms from one-man-bands to multinational corporations are working against the clock to ensure that they’re compliant with the new rules by Friday 25th May 2018. As we discussed in our previous post, failure to adhere to the rules laid out by the GDPR could be extremely costly – with bankruptcy a very real threat.Read More »
Data Protection. Whatever your views on it, it’s about to take up a whole lot more of your time, even if you’re a sole trader.
The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is the new legislation to come from Brussels which is designed to create consistent data protection laws that apply to every European citizen and which aims to “strengthen consumer protection and enhance trust and confidence in how personal data is used and managed”. This new law replaces 1995’s Data Protection Directive (from which the Data Protection Act was born) and covers how personal data is gathered, stored, shared, processed and used.
The GDPR has been four years in the making and, although it’s not due to be formally published until this summer and then enforced in 2018, it’s already bringing the subject of data protection into the boardroom for the simple reason that a DP breach poses such a massive financial risk that even the largest company could see its operating profit disappear.Read More »
Timing is everything in the world of media relations – one of the cardinal rules is that if you have bad news, try and “break it” when there’s something else going on to mitigate its impact. For the cynical, it seems that the Conservatives tried to employ this strategy last week by scheduling the reading of the Budget the very next day after the lengthy debate and first House of Commons vote on the IPB. Whether they were hoping for the sugar tax to sweeten any negative publicity over the controversial and divisive IPB, or vice versa, is anyone’s guess.
The key takeaway from last Tuesday’s reading, debate and vote is that the IP Bill took a step closer to becoming law. 281 MPs voted in favour versus just 15 against, while both Labour and the SNP abstained to vote (the Bill would have been defeated had they voted against it). Shadow home secretary Andy Burnham defended Labour’s ‘on the fence’ stance by saying “Britain needs a new law in this area. Outright opposition which some are proposing… risks sinking this Bill and leaving the interim laws [DRIPA etc] in place”. The SNP meanwhile is holding its power to sink the Bill until after the next Committee stage, wherein they seek to change the proposed legislation “significantly”.Read More »
Less than three weeks after it received scathing criticism from no fewer than three parliamentary committees, news that a revised Investigatory Powers Bill was to be published today was gently released by Theresa May at the weekend. From past experience we’re not surprised this has happened but we’re hanging our head in despair. How can a government be able to rail-road such a controversial Bill through without proper consultation or, at the very least, further dialogue on the points the three committees raised? Today’s action is indicative of a Government that is intent on forcing through legislation that furthers its own agenda with little consideration of the consequences.
Back in December 2015 Entanet provided written evidence to the Select Committee, raising concerns over the definition of a ‘Communications Service Provider’, the timescales to implement the IPB, the cost of implementation and who will pay, the vagueness of ‘Internet Connection Records’ and the robustness of any system to guarantee that data on private citizens would remain secure and not open to abuse or intrusion for malevolent means.Read More »
The ‘Snooper’s Charter’ in its various iterations has been an ongoing cause for concern for Entanet and the industry as a whole for several years now and, as we move ever closer towards its seemingly inevitable implementation as the Investigatory Powers Bill (IPB), we decided to have a chat with ISPA’s Secretary General, Nicholas Lansman to find out his concerns for industry and what he thinks the committee scrutinising the Bill should be focusing on.
Parliament is currently scrutinising the Draft Investigatory Powers Bill, which aims to ‘consolidate existing legislation and ensure the powers in the Bill are fit for the digital age’.
Whilst ISPA welcomes a new Bill to replace the outdated legislation governing this area, there are specific concerns from ISPA, Entanet and industry around the lack of clarity in the Bill, its costs and what exactly will be expected of ISPs.Read More »
It’s certainly been an eventful year within the industry, with plenty of innovations and new technologies and trends emerging, an abundance of regulatory changes both UK and EU based, industry process changes with things like the new switching process and channel unrest with a clear backlash against BT’s relationship with Openreach. We’ve tried to keep you up to date and informed about the key issues that affect you and your customers as part of this fascinating channel, as well as providing useful eBooks and sales advice along the way too.
If you missed any of the blog this year and would like a quick recap, why not download our ‘2015- A year of Opinion in review’ eBook and have a catch up over the holidays. Simply enter your email address into the form field below to receive your free copy.Read More »
The consultation period for the new Investigatory Powers Bill, nicknamed the Snooper’s Charter 3.0, has begun and the information emerging so far is already raising industry concerns. Mainly the fact that the new data retention orders will potentially only apply to larger ISPs; all affected ISPs will be effectively ‘gagged’ from discussing their involvement; and the consultation period has been significantly reduced to just 3 weeks!
Smaller ISPs unaffected?
According to www.ispreview.co.uk, “the Government already has data retention orders with the biggest broadband ISPs under the existing regime and told the smaller providers that, going forwards, the expectation was for such orders to continue to only be served upon the big boys.”Read More »
Labour tried it with the IMP (Interception Modernisation Programme), then the coalition Government tried it with CCDP (Communications Capabilities Development Programme). When that failed they morphed it into the Communications Data Bill which also failed, so then the new Tory Government hastily introduced DRIP (Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Bill) but that has a sunset clause of December 2016. It’s not surprising then that last week yet another new draft Bill was announced – this time it’s called the Investigatory Powers Bill. So what will this latest iteration which has already been widely nicknamed the ‘Snooper’s Charter 3.0’ have in store for us?Read More »
Earlier this week the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) ruled that Safe Harbour is invalid due to its lack of protection against mass surveillance by the US Government. So, what is Safe Harbour and what impact will this ruling have on UK citizens and businesses?
What is Safe Harbor?
European data protection laws mean that companies can only transfer EU citizens’ data to countries that provide an ‘adequate’ level of data protection. Because the US doesn’t meet this criteria an agreement was made with them in 2000 called ‘Safe Harbor’ which simply required the company to self-certify that they undertake the necessary steps to ensure data is protected. However, following several revelations including those from Edward Snowden regarding the US Government’s mass surveillance practices, the CJEU has now ruled that this agreement is invalid as it doesn’t provide adequate protection. This means with immediate effect companies transferring data between the EU and the US will be affected.Read More »
The highly controversial DRIPA (Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act) was dealt a further blow last week when the High Court ruled that parts of the current law were unlawful and inconsistent with European Union law.
DRIPA is a temporary law which was brought in to replace the ‘invalid’ RIPA (Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act) following last year’s European Court of Justice rulings but it seems this replacement law has also fallen foul of the courts when queried by Tom Watson MP, David Davis MP and civil rights group Liberty, who worked together to bring the case to court.
Whilst DRIPA is due to be replaced by an allegedly tougher law by the end of 2016, the High Court has ruled that it needs significantly adjusting before that date. By March 2016 the law must be amended to require independent approval to access communications data.Read More »