DOCSLIB.ORG

Journal of International Media & Entertainment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Journal of International Media & Entertainment JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL MEDIA & ENTERTAINMENT LAW PUBLISHED BY THE DONALD E. BIEDERMAN ENTERTAINMENT AND MEDIA LAW INSTITUTE OF SOUTHWESTERN LAW SCHOOL IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION FORUMS ON COMMUNICATIONS LAW AND THE ENTERTAINMENT AND SPORTS INDUSTRIES Volume 7, Number 1 2016–2017 SYMPOSIUM FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LAWS ON THE GLOBAL STAGE: PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE EDITOR’S NOTE ARTICLES From Sweden to the Global Stage: FOI as European Human Right? David Goldberg Why the French FOIA “Failed” Tom McClean Sunlight Where It’s Needed: The Case for Freedom of Media Information Roy Peled Legislating Usability: Freedom of Information Laws That Help Users Identify What They Want Mark Weiler JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL MEDIA & ENTERTAINMENT LAW Volume 7 Number 1 2016–2017 PUBLISHED BY THE DONALD E. BIEDERMAN ENTERTAINMENT AND MEDIA LAW INSTITUTE OF SOUTHWESTERN LAW SCHOOL IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION FORUMS ON COMMUNICATIONS LAW AND THE ENTERTAINMENT AND SPORTS INDUSTRIES Mission Statement: The Journal of International Media & Entertainment Law is a semi- annual publication of the Donald E. Biederman Entertainment and Media Law Institute of Southwestern Law School in association with the American Bar Association Forums on Communications Law and the Entertainment and Sports Industries. The Journal provides a forum for exploring the complex and unsettled legal principles that apply to the production and distribution of media and entertainment in an international, comparative, and local context. The legal issues surrounding the creation and dissemination of news and entertainment products on a worldwide basis necessarily implicate the laws, customs, and practices of multiple jurisdictions. The Journal examines the impact of the Internet and other technologies, the often-conflicting laws affecting media and entertainment issues, and the legal ramifications of widely divergent cultural views of privacy, defamation, intellectual property, and government regulation. Subscriptions: Print subscriptions are available at an annual rate of $US 50 (domestic) or $US 60 (foreign). Please direct inquiries to the Biederman Institute at Southwestern Law School, 3050 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, California 90010, (213) 738-6602, or send an email to [email protected]. Back issues are available for $US 30.00 per copy plus $US 5.95 for shipping and handling. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in the articles published in the Journal of International Media & Entertainment Law are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Donald E. Biederman Entertainment and Media Law Institute, Southwestern Law School, the American Bar Association, the Forum on Communications Law, or the Forum on the Entertainment and Sports Industries. Law School: For information about the Biederman Institute or Southwestern Law School, please contact Professor Robert Lind and Professor Neil Ollivierra, Southwestern Law School, 3050 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, California 90010, (213) 738-6842, or send an email to [email protected]. Membership: For information about membership in the Forum on Communications Law or the Forum on the Entertainment and Sports Industries, please contact the ABA Service Center, 321 North Clark Street, Chicago, Illinois 60654-7598, (800) 285-2211, or send an email to [email protected]. Permission to Reprint: Requests to reproduce portions of this issue must be submitted by email to [email protected]. Submission Guidelines: Submission guidelines are printed on the inside back cover of each issue. © 2017 Southwestern Law School The Journal of International Media & Entertainment Law is published twice a year by Southwestern Law School, in cooperation with the American Bar Association. ISSN: 1556-875X. Postmaster: Send address changes to the Biederman Institute at Southwestern Law School, 3050 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, California 90010. JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL MEDIA & ENTERTAINMENT LAW INTERNATIONAL COMPARATIVE LOCAL VOLUME 7 NUMBER 1 2016–2017 SUPERVISING EDITOR Michael M. Epstein Southwestern Law School BOARD OF EDITORS Janine Small, Chair Carolyn Forrest, Chair ABA Forum on the ABA Forum on Entertainment and Sports Industries Communications Law Peter Bartlett Kevin Goering Nathan Siegel Minter Ellison Lawyers Norwick, Schad & Goering Levine, Sullivan, Koch & Schulz Eric S. Brown David Goldberg Mark Stephens Franklin, Weinrib, Rudell & Vassallo, P.C. University of London Howard Kennedy LLP Chunghwan Choi Robert Lutz John Tehranian Lee & Ko Southwestern Law School Southwestern Law School J. Alexandra Darraby Michael Scott Cydney A. Tune The Art Law Firm Southwestern Law School Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, LLP Silvia Faerman Brian A. Rosenblatt Kurt Wimmer Southwestern Law School Bryce, Downey & Lenkov LLC Covington & Burling, LLP Jeff Gewirtz Kyu Ho Youm NETS Basketball/Brooklyn University of Oregon Sports & Entertainment SUPERVISING STUDENT EDITOR Emily A. Rehm STUDENT EDITORS Harmony Anderson Jessica Lusk Nadia Sokolova Charlie Wang Chiara Genovese Inez Morales Jason Souza Alexa Whiteside Shahab Elliot Hakakzadeh Jaclyn Ponish Christina Steele Nikta Yazdi Shelby Luchesi-Gallaher Ashley Ramos Aldwin Tañala PUBLISHED BY THE DONALD E. BIEDERMAN ENTERTAINMENT AND MEDIA LAW INSTITUTE OF SOUTHWESTERN LAW SCHOOL IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION FORUMS ON COMMUNICATIONS LAW AND THE ENTERTAINMENT AND SPORTS INDUSTRIES JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL MEDIA & ENTERTAINMENT LAW INTERNATIONAL COMPARATIVE LOCAL VOLUME 7 NUMBER 1 2016–2017 SYMPOSIUM FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LAWS ON THE GLOBAL STAGE: PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE Contents vii Editor’s Note MICHAEL M. EPSTEIN ARTICLES 1 From Sweden to the Global Stage: FOI as European Human Right? DAVID GOLDBERG 31 Why the French FOIA “Failed” TOM MCCLEAN 65 Sunlight Where It’s Needed: The Case for Freedom of Media Information ROY PELED 101 Legislating Usability: Freedom of Information Laws That Help Users Identify What They Want MARK WEILER PUBLISHED BY THE DONALD E. BIEDERMAN ENTERTAINMENT AND MEDIA LAW INSTITUTE OF SOUTHWESTERN LAW SCHOOL IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION FORUMS ON COMMUNICATIONS LAW AND THE ENTERTAINMENT AND SPORTS INDUSTRIES Editor’s Note I am pleased to report that our November 2016 conference, Freedom of Information Laws on the Global Stage: Past Present and Future, exceeded our expectations in both attendance and presentations. As a result, Volume 7 of JIMEL will be entirely devoted to scholarship generated by the symposium, which attracted practitioners and scholars from every continent except Antarctica. This issue contains four articles that underscore the diversity of scholarship that was present at the Freedom of Information Conference. The first article, From Sweden to the Global Stage: FOI as a European Human Right? by U.K.-based media law professor David Goldberg, sets the stage for the historical context of the conference. A groundbreaking scholar on the history of freedom of information laws, Professor Goldberg poses the question: Does the European Court of Human Rights have an opportunity to declare freedom of information as a stand-alone human right? Tom McClean, in Why the French FOIA Law Failed, argues that France’s 1978 statute has effectively been a “failure,” despite its similarity in text to FOIA laws in other countries. Dr. McClean, the head of the Uniting Organization in Australia, traces low use of the French statute to the institutional, social and political context into which the law was introduced. In Sunlight Where It’s Needed: The Case for Media Information, Professor Roy Peled posits an “accountability gap” between the media’s role in democratic societies and its scrutiny-free operation. Mindful of press freedoms, Professor Peled, an information expert who teaches at the Hebrew University, calls for creating disclosure requirements for news organizations and social media to reduce censorship and curb irresponsible media behavior. This issue’s final article, Legislating Usability: Freedom of Information Laws that Help Users Identify What They Want, by Dr. Mark Weiler, offers a fascinating analysis of the description conventions that must be in place before the government can identify and retrieve information. Dr. Weiler, a library studies scholar at Wilfrid Laurier University in Canada, contends that government officials and civil oversight groups could improve usability of FOI statutes by recognizing the importance of statutory clauses that require government bodies to publish descriptions to facilitate access. A second group of symposium articles will be published in Issue 2 of this volume. vii As we look forward to Volume 8, I am pleased to announce that JIMEL is organizing a 2018 symposium conference entitled Fake News and “Weaponized Defamation”: Global Perspectives, in partnership with the Southwestern Law Review and Southwestern International Law Journal. The symposium will be held in Los Angeles on January 26, 2018. Fake news is often associated with the rise of extremist voices in political discourse and, specifically, an agenda to “deconstruct” the power of government, institutional media, and the scientific establishment. It is also a phenomenon that has long historical roots in government propaganda, jingoistic newspapers, and business-controlled public relations. “Weaponized defamation” refers to the invocation, and increasing use, of defamation and privacy torts by people in power to threaten press investigations, despite laws protecting responsible
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ICO – Privacy Impact Assessment Handbook
    Using this handbook Part 1 – Background information Part 2 – The PIA process Appendix 1 – The PIA screening questions Appendix 2 – Data protection compliance checklist template Appendix 3 – PECR compliance checklist template Appendix 4 – Privacy strategies Using this handbook Back to ICO homepage Advice on using this handbook Because organisations vary greatly in size, the extent to which their activities intrude on privacy, and their experience in dealing with privacy issues makes it difficult to write a ‘one size fits all’ guide. The purpose of this handbook is to be comprehensive. It is important to note now that not all of the information provided in this handbook will be relevant to every project that will be assessed. The handbook is split into two distinct parts. Part I (Chapters I and II) are designed to give background information on the privacy impact assessment (PIA) process and privacy. Part II is a practical “how to” guide on the PIA process. The handbook’s structure is intended to enable a reader who is knowledgeable about privacy to quickly start working on the PIA. Background information on privacy and PIAs is provided for other readers who would like some general information prior to starting the PIA process. It is also important to note that some of the recommendations in this handbook may overlap with work which is being done to satisfy other requirements, such as information security and assurance, other forms of impact assessment or requirements to carry out broader consultations during the development of a project. A PIA does not have to be conducted as a completely separate exercise and it can be useful to consider privacy issues in a broader policy context.
    [Show full text]
  • Spotlight On… Protection of Sensitive Data Including Personal Information
    Spotlight On… Protection of Sensitive Data including Personal Information Purpose On Sept. 7, 2017 media reports indicated that a large American credit score bureau had been breached, exposing the personal information of millions of consumers in the U.S. and in the U.K. and potentially affecting 8,000 individuals in Canada. On November 28, 2017 the Canadian arm of this U.S. company posted information on its website indicating that an additional 11,670 Canadians had been affected by the breach, bringing the total number of Canadians affected to about 19,000. In response to CCIRC partner questions concerning this event, this product provides information on what organizations can do to reduce the risk of sensitive data, such as personal information, being exfiltrated from their organization. Information in this note includes: . The Canadian statutory definitions of personal information . Upcoming regulatory changes to data breach reporting in Canada . Examples of reported breaches of Canadian personal information . Tactics, techniques, and procedures employed to target Canadian personal information . Tips for safeguarding sensitive information . Advice from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) for individuals who believe their personal information may have been compromised What is “Personal Information”? According to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC), these are the statutory provisions relevant to the meaning of “Personal Information” in Canada: Section 2(1) of the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents
    [Show full text]
  • June 10, 2021 President Joseph R. Biden the White House 1600
    June 10, 2021 President Joseph R. Biden The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President: We, the undersigned civil rights, civil liberties, privacy, government accountability, and consumer rights organizations, urge your Administration to ensure that any new transatlantic data transfer deal is coupled with the enactment of U.S. laws that reform government surveillance practices and provide comprehensive privacy protections. The United States’ failure to ensure meaningful privacy protections for personal data is the reason that a growing number of countries are concerned about trans-border data flows. Until the United States addresses this problem, concerns about data transfers to the United States will remain, and data flow agreements are likely to be invalidated. Recent history demonstrates that any transatlantic data transfer agreement will be subject to litigation to determine whether it provides adequate protection for personal data. In 2015, the Court of Justice of the European Union invalidated the U.S.-EU Safe Harbor agreement. And in July 2020, the successor agreement, Privacy Shield, was also invalidated by the same court. Without reform of U.S. surveillance and privacy laws, any new transatlantic data transfer deal will likely face a similar fate. The only way to fully address these issues and enter into a lasting transatlantic agreement is to harmonize data protection standards between the European Union and the United States. There have been calls for the United States to strengthen and modernize its privacy laws since long before the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation came into effect in 2018. The modern concept of the right to privacy was invented in the United States – but now we lag behind many other nations on privacy protections.
    [Show full text]
  • Survey on Privacy Preserving in Social Networks
    International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR) ISSN (Online): 2319-7064 Index Copernicus Value (2015): 78.96 | Impact Factor (2015): 6.391 Survey on Privacy Preserving in Social Networks S. Mayil1, Dr. M. Vanitha2 1Research scholar, PG & Research Department of Computer Science, JJ College of Arts and Science (Autonomous), Pudukkottai, Tamil Nadu, India 2Assistant Professor, Ph.D. and Research Department of Computer Application, Alagappa University, Karaikudi , Tamilnadu. Abstract: The development of online social networks and the release of data network resulting in the risk of leakage of personal confidential information. This requires privacy protection before the data network is published by the service provider. Data privacy online social networks are important in recent years. Therefore, this research is still in its infancy. This article describes the generalization techniques of anonymous social networking data with sufficient privacy for harsh environments while preserving the validity of the data. The loss metric information, iloss, is used to check the information due to the loss of the generalized amount. While these networks make frequent data sharing and intercommunication between users can instantly and privacy problems that may arise are very explicable with their obvious immediate consequences. Although the concept of privacy can take different forms, the ultimate challenge is how to prevent the invasion of privacy when personal information is available. Basic social networks, co-statements, and their associated primary motivations. The following describes how to protect privacy, relying on technical analysis and link social networks to disclose sensitive user information. Keywords: Data Privacy, Data Publishing, Privacy Preserving, Social Network, Service Provider. 1. Introduction data may affect the privacy of individuals.
    [Show full text]
  • CJEU Ruling on Facebook Action on January 25, 2018: Class Action, Model Case Or No Jurisdiction?
    CJEU ruling on Facebook action on January 25, 2018: Class action, model case or no jurisdiction? In August 2014, lawyer and data protection expert Max Schrems filed a lawsuit against Facebook with his competent court in Vienna, as previous complaints in Ireland have not been decided by the Irish Data Protection Commissioner since 2011. Now the CJEU decides on the admissibility of the lawsuit against Facebook. Previously, in 2015 Schrems brought down the EU-US “Safe Harbor” system through a case against Facebook at the CJEU. Dispute solely on jurisdiction and on two questions Facebook has submitted various grounds with the court in Vienna, why the procedure should not be heard at all. The majority of these attempts to prevent the procedure have already been rejected by the Austria courts over the past three years. What remained, were two questions: (1) whether Mr Schrems is a "consumer" or has lost this status through his pro bono work as a privacy advocate; and (2) whether he can bring claims of other users jointly in a "class action". The class action is financed by ROLAND Prozessfinanz AG. Facebook wants each of the 25,000 other users to have to sue in a separate procedure - which would make the legal costs skyrocket and a case against Facebook financially impossible for most users. In Facebook’s view, the same legal and factual issues should therefore be trailed 25,000 times in front of thousands of European courts and judges (“divide and conquer”). These two questions were submitted to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) for a preliminary ruling by the Austrian Supreme Court.
    [Show full text]
  • Facebook: Where Privacy Concerns and Social Needs Collide
    Edith Cowan University Research Online Theses: Doctorates and Masters Theses 2020 Facebook: Where privacy concerns and social needs collide Sonya Scherini Edith Cowan University Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.ecu.edu.au/theses Part of the Communication Technology and New Media Commons, Mass Communication Commons, and the Social Media Commons Recommended Citation Scherini, S. (2020). Facebook: Where privacy concerns and social needs collide. https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ theses/2331 This Thesis is posted at Research Online. https://ro.ecu.edu.au/theses/2331 Edith Cowan University Copyright Warning You may print or download ONE copy of this document for the purpose of your own research or study. The University does not authorize you to copy, communicate or otherwise make available electronically to any other person any copyright material contained on this site. You are reminded of the following: Copyright owners are entitled to take legal action against persons who infringe their copyright. A reproduction of material that is protected by copyright may be a copyright infringement. Where the reproduction of such material is done without attribution of authorship, with false attribution of authorship or the authorship is treated in a derogatory manner, this may be a breach of the author’s moral rights contained in Part IX of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth). Courts have the power to impose a wide range of civil and criminal sanctions for infringement of copyright, infringement of moral rights and other offences under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth). Higher penalties may apply, and higher damages may be awarded, for offences and infringements involving the conversion of material into digital or electronic form.
    [Show full text]
  • A Collaborative Framework: for Privacy Protection in Online Social Networks
    A Collaborative Framework: for Privacy Protection in Online Social Networks 4 4 Yan Zhu1,2, Zexing Hu1, Huaixi Wang3, Hongxin Hu , Gail-Joon Ahn 1 Institute of Computer Science and Technology, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China 2Key Laboratory of Network and Software Security Assurance (Peking University), Ministry of Education, China 3School of Mathematical Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China, 4Laboratory of Security Engineering for Future Computing (SEFCOM), Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287, USA Email: {yan.zhu.huzx.wanghx}@pku.edu.cn. {hxhu,gahn }@asu.edu Abstract-With the wide use of online social networks (OSNs) , Although some new techniques were introduced in these the problem of data privacy has attracted much attention. solutions, it is still necessary for a centralized server to Several approaches have been proposed to address this issue. enforce access control, which cannot protect the privacy of One of privacy management approaches for OSN leverages a key users against the centralized server. Also, some solutions management technique to enable a user to simply post encrypted contents so that only users who can satisfy the associate security implemented access control at client-side but their approach policy can derive the key to access the data. However, the key should be synchronous, requiring multiple users to be online management policies of existing schemes may grant access to simultaneously. unaurhorized users and cannot efficiently determine authorized One of efficient ways for enforcing access control in OSN users. In this paper, we propose a collaborative framework is to allow users to put the encrypted data on the server and which enforces access control for OSN through an innovative key management focused on communities.
    [Show full text]
  • Airplane! by Michael Schlesinger
    Airplane! By Michael Schlesinger In most people’s minds, the 1970s break neatly in two. The first half was the so- called Silver Age of Holly- wood, when a new genera- tion of directors arose and put their stamp on the mov- ies: Scorsese, Coppola, DePalma, Friedkin and oth- ers made ambitious, rule- breaking films that seemed to spell the end of the vaunted studio system (save Peter Bogdanovich, Stewardess Julie Hagerty and erstwhile pilot Robert Hays in the cockpit of the doomed who made traditional pictures ‘Airplane!’ Courtesy Library of Congress Collection. in a modern way). But a funny thing happened on the way to auteur nirvana: two “Zero Hour!” (Davison avers this was totally a coinci- other New Kids inadvertently killed the silver goose, dence.) The brass liked it yet were skeptical, but leg- and by the time the dust settled, Spielberg and Lucas endary producer Howard W. Koch “got” it and volun- were the new white-haired boys, and the studios teered to come aboard. With that reassurance and a were back in the blockbuster business for good. reasonable $3.5 million budget, Michael Eisner gave them the green light. Yet what most people forget is that big money was already being hauled in throughout the decade by an It didn’t begin smoothly. ZAZ, as they were called, exceedingly old-fashioned genre: the disaster film. wanted dramatic actors not known for comedy, who George Seaton’s good-natured “Airport” made a kill- would deliver the goofy dialogue perfectly seriously; ing in 1970, but it was considered a one-off throw- Paramount thought this was bonkers and wanted back.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Privacy Report
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ANNUAL PRIVACY REPORT THE CHIEF PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES OFFICER AND THE OFFICE OF PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES OCTOBER 1, 2016 – SEPTEMBER 30, 2020 1 (MULTI) ANNUAL PRIVACY REPORT MESSAGE FROM THE CHIEF PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES OFFICER I am pleased to present the Department of Justice’s (Department or DOJ) Annual Privacy Report, describing the operations and activities of the Chief Privacy and Civil Liberties Officer (CPCLO) and the Office of Privacy and Civil Liberties (OPCL), in accordance with Section 1174 of the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005. This report covers the period from October 1, 2016, through September 30, 2020. The Department’s privacy program is supported by a team of dedicated privacy professionals who strive to build a culture and understanding of privacy within the complex and diverse mission work of the Department. The work of the Department’s privacy team is evident in the care, consideration, and dialogue about privacy that is incorporated in the daily operations of the Department. During this reporting period, there has been an evolving landscape of technological development and advancement in areas such as artificial intelligence, biometrics, complex data flows, and an increase in the number of cyber security events resulting in significant impacts to the privacy of individuals. Thus, the CPCLO and OPCL have developed new policies and guidance to assist the Department with navigating these areas, some of which include the following:
    [Show full text]
  • Checkliste Datenverkehr Eu - Usa
    CHECKLISTE DATENVERKEHR EU - USA 1. Findet ein Datenverkehr mit den USA statt?1 ☐ Datenübermittlung in die USA an o Konzernunternehmen? o direkte Vertragspartner (laufende Projekte, Kooperationen etc)? ☐ Datenhosting in den USA? o Software-Hosting (z.B. HubSpot, Apple) o Clouds (z.B. Microsoft, Google, Amazon) o Mailings (z.B. Gmail, Mailchimp) ☐ Social Media Nutzung mit USA-Beteiligung? o Social Media Accounts (Facebook, Instagram, Twitter) o Social Media Fanpages o Social PlugIns 2. Ist das datenempfangende US Unternehmen ein „elektronischer Diensteanbieter“ wie in der beanstandeten Regelung des Section 702 Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) gefordert? ☐ Ja –> Weiter zu 3. ☐ Nein. 15.1. Werden sonstige Sicherheitsmaßnahmen vom US-Unternehmen getroffen, um etwaigen Datenzugriff Unberechtigter zu verhindern? ☐ Ich weiß es nicht. In diesem Fall können Sie einen Fragebogen (wie z.B. von NOYB) an das US Unternehmen schicken, um abzuklären, ob das Unternehmen unter die strengen Überwachungsgesetze der USA fällt, welche vom Europäischen Gerichtshof problematisch gesehen wurden. Das sind z.B.: - Telekommunikationsanbieter - Clouddiensteanbieter - Anbieter elektronischer Kommunikationsdienste - sonstige gesetzliche oder freiwillige Überwachungsmaßnahme von Seiten der US-Behörden, an denen das Unternehmen beteiligt ist? 3. Auf welcher Grundlage findet der Datentransfer statt? ☐ Privacy Shield –> Weiter zu 4. ☐ Standardvertragsklauseln (SCC) –> Weiter zu 5. ☐ Binding Corporate Rules (BRC) –> Weiter zu 6. ☐ genehmigte Vertragsklauseln –> Derzeit keine Änderung notwendig! ☐ ausdrückliche Einwilligung –> Prüfung von: 1 Falls auch nur ein Punkt bejaht wird –> Weiter zu 2. o Verträgen und Einwilligungserklärungen der Betroffenen, o Informationserteilung an Betroffene über Risiken in Drittland. -> Derzeit keine Änderung notwendig. ☐ Vertragserfüllung: o Verträge und AGB prüfen o Übermittlung ist für Vertragserfüllung zwischen der betroffenen Person und dem Verantwortlichen oder zur Durchführung von vorvertraglichen Maßnahmen auf Antrag der betroffenen Person erforderlich.
    [Show full text]
  • Cannon News 0314
    CANNON NEWSCANNON March 2014 NEWS Page 1 Francis Cannon VFW Post 7589 Manassas, Virginia March 2014 February 23: 8th District Commander Rick Raskin observes as Peter MacLeod, District 8 Youth Chair, presents an award to Peter Nosal, winner of the District 8 Patriot’s Pen contest for 2013/14. Peter is a 6th grade student at Auburn Middle School and was submitted through Post 9835, Warrenton. In This Issue: COLA Penalty Removed for Most VFW Statement on Military Retiree COLA Vote Benefits Fights Not Over GMU to offer course on Vietnam this summer Celebrity Soldiers Upcoming Events New VFW Store website CANNON NEWS—2013 Clair B. Poff Public Relations Award for Most Outstanding Post Publication/Newsletter, VFW Department of Virginia CANNON NEWS March 2014 Page 2 From the Editor Have you visited your Post website They are available to view online . lately? www.vfw7589.org Take a look... Its the best place to keep current with what’s going on at your Post. We Please contact me if you have any- update it at least once a week, and thing you’d like posted or have any often more frequently. comments or suggestions. Recent additions include 14 new Rick Raskin episodes of “Operation Freedom” the [email protected] monthly veteran interview show broadcast on Comcast Cable and hosted by our own Steve Botello. Commander’s Report Most are not veterans and have never if warranted and not eliminated be- experienced the long period of sepa- cause another social program; not to ration from family and friends. The have their retirement entitlements long nights awake on an outpost, eroded; and most importantly, not listening, thinking you hear some- just being ignored.
    [Show full text]
  • Gibson Dunn Paris | Data Protection – December 2020
    December 14, 2020 GIBSON DUNN PARIS | DATA PROTECTION – DECEMBER 2020 To Our Clients and Friends: Personal Data Watch Europe 11/27/2020 – Committee of Convention 108 | Guidelines | Children's data protection in education setting The Council of Europe’s Committee of Convention 108 published guidelines on children's data protection in an education setting. For further information: Council of the Europe Website 11/20/2020 – Presidency of the Council of the European Union | Progress report | ePrivacy Regulation The European Data Protection Board (EDPB) published a statement on the ePrivacy Regulation and the future role of Supervisory Authorities and the EDPB. In particular, the EDPB expressed its concerns about the latest developments regarding the enforcement of the future ePrivacy Regulation, which would create fragmentation of supervision, procedural complexity, as well as lack of consistency and legal certainty. For further information: EDPB Website 11/17/2020 – European Data Protection Supervisor | Opinion | European Health Data Space The European Data Protection Supervisor published a Preliminary Opinion on the European Health Data Space, which aims to highlight the essential elements to be taken into account in its elaboration from a data protection perspective. For further information: EDPB Website 11/10/2020 – European Data Protection Board | Document | Procedure for the development of informal Codes of Conduct sessions The European Data Protection Board (EDPB) published a document on the procedure for the development of informal “Codes of Conduct sessions”. For further information: EDPB Website 11/12/2020 – European Commission | Draft Standard Contractual Clauses The European Commission published two draft Standard Contractual Clauses: (i) the first to carry out an international transfer of data to a third country in the absence of an adequacy decision under Article 46 of the GDPR, and (ii) the second to regulate the relationship between data controller and data processor in accordance with the requirements of Article 28.
    [Show full text]