European Convention on Human Rights, Article 8

The Human Rights Act 1998, implementing the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 8, has given effect to the right to family and private life, including home and correspondence. Private life may cover one’s sexuality, personal identity, relationships with other people, and personal information. Family life covers family relations. This essay will explore the right of privacy in this world where the Internet has become an integral part of everyone’s life. For those who are seeking HRM dissertation help, understanding the nuances of privacy rights within the framework of human rights law can be crucial.

Mark Assignment Help Expert https://api.whatsapp.com

Online privacy has no clear demarcation between personal privacy and informational privacy. It is contextual based on who has access to information and when, how and what the information might be used for. A greater control of data by data subjects is required. Thus, one can see in online platforms ‘signing in’ to a service; ‘Browse-wrap’ consent; or the ‘opt-out’ system.

The penetration of the internet into one’s life has led to many landmark court cases, involving corporations, government agencies, and private parties. Some of the examples are Lloyd v Google LLC (loss of control of data), R (Bridges) v Chief Constable of South Wales Police and Others (live automated facial recognition technology unlawful), ZXC v Bloomberg LP (misuse of private information through publication of an article containing the information), and Bull v Desporte (misuse of private information by including intimate details about a relationship in a book).

The pervasive nature of the internet calls for greater control of one’s private information. This is highlighted in paragraph 86 of the Court of Appeal decision in Lloyd stating that iPhone users suffered damages due to “clear, repeated and widespread breaches of Google’s data processing obligations”. Users of online platforms should, thus, have greater control over their privacy and private data. However, at the same time, it is also found that users’ opinion about greater privacy does not match with their practice. They needlessly reveal their private data even though they described themselves as private. Hence, an adequate legal framework is required to prevent unlawful access to private data. For example, alleged governmental mass surveillance systematic and pervasive can systematically and pervasively violate online privacy.

In order to protect one’s privacy and their online data and information, the UK has the Data protection Act 2018, which has implemented The General Data Protection Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (“GDPR”). Section 1 provides that personal data processing is subject to GDPR. This Act provides for duties and responsibilities of parties that control and process private data (example Section 56) and also the rights of people whose data is processed or controlled (example Section 45). At the same time, the laws cannot be adequate in entirety. Hence, the government calls for technological mechanism to enhance privacy protection, including integrating “Privacy by Design” into the “Internet protocols” so as to make technical standards and laws actively inform each other.

To conclude, online privacy rights have many layers including legal and regulatory framework, users practice and online service providers compliances. The complexity requires overall legal regulation and self-regulation to build an effective protection mechanism.

Continue your exploration of Equity's Certainties and Flexibilities with our related content.

Bibliography

Legislation

The Data protection Act 2018

The Human Rights Act 1998

The General Data Protection Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (“GDPR”)

Cases

Lloyd v Google LLC [2019] EWCA Civ 1599.

R (Bridges) v Chief Constable of South Wales Police and Others [2019] EWHC 2341 (Admin).

ZXC v Bloomberg LP [2019] EWHC 970 (QB).

Bull v Desporte [2019] EWHC 1650 (QB).

Lloyd v Google LLC [2019] EWCA Civ 1599

Books

Berna Pl, Internet Privacy Rights: Rights to Protect Autonomy (Cambridge University Press 2014)

Williams M and Jason RC Nurse, ‘Optional data disclosure and the online privacy paradox: A UK perspective’ in Tryfonas T. (ed.), Human Aspects of Information Security, Privacy, and Trust (Springer, Cham 2016)

Journals

Epstein D, Merrill C. Roth, and Eric PS Baumer, ‘It's the definition, stupid! Framing of online privacy in the internet governance forum debates’ (2014) 4 Journal of Information Policy 144-172.

Rachovitsa A, ‘Engineering and lawyering privacy by design: understanding online privacy both as a technical and an international human rights issue’ (2016) 24(4) International journal of law and information technology 374-399.

Websites

• Citizens Advice, ‘Your right to respect for private and family life’ (2021) accessed 16 October 2021