action on india; FW: Data protection framework india
kyungs...@korea.ac.kr
Dear members of DC --- The Indian government is preparing to legislate a data protection law and is fielding input from people on RTBF. I think that UN IGF DC Publicness can submit its opinion on. So I copied the relevant chapter below and if you want to read the full 260 page call for input, you can get it here. http://meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/white_paper_on_data_protection_in_india_171127_final_v2.pdf.
We can take volunteers now and the volunteers will do a first draft, and we can pass through this mail group for approval. Any volunteers?
WARNING: The deadline is December 31, 2017.
KS Park
_________________________________________________________________________________________
CHAPTER 10: INDIVIDUAL PARTICIPATION RIGHTS 3- RIGHT TO BE FORGOTTEN
10.1 Introduction
The right to be forgotten in the digital sphere refers to the right of individuals to request data controllers to erase any data about them from their systems.630 The principal driver behind the idea of the right to be forgotten is the massive expansion in the availability and accessibility of information associated with the digital world of the Internet.631
It is quite common for Internet users to reveal personal information they later regret,632 or to have information posted about them that they wished had remained secret.633 Information posted on the Internet is never truly forgotten. Once personal data enters the online ecosystem, the original purpose behind disclosure becomes irrelevant.634 When allowed to flow freely, data is open to interpretation and use (or misuse) completely divorced from their original context.635 Often, the very fact of certain information being online may itself cause considerable embarrassment and loss of reputation for an individual. For example, in the Google Spain Case,636 an old article concerning an attachment and garnishment action against a Spanish individual (that was later resolved) was the first link when anyone ran an online search of this individual‘s name which allegedly resulted in his loss of reputation.
The Indian judiciary through the Karnataka High Court in Sri Vasunathan v. The Registrar General637 has recognised the right to be forgotten and safeguarded the same in sensitive cases involving women in general and highly sensitive cases involving rape or affecting the modesty and reputation of the person concerned, in particular. Further, the importance of a right to be forgotten was further emphasised by the Supreme Court in Puttaswamy.638 The Supreme Court opined that, ―the impact of the digital age results in information on the Internet being permanent. Moreover, any endeavour to remove information from the Internet may not result in its absolute obliteration. It is thus, said that in the digital world preservation is the norm and forgetting a struggle.639 People are not static; they are entitled to re-invent themselves and correct their past actions. It is privacy which nurtures this ability and removes the shackles of unadvisable things which may have been done in the past.‖640
Therefore, the recognition of the right to privacy envisages within its contours the right to protect personal information on the Internet. Consequently, from this right, it follows, that any individual may have the derivative right to remove the ‗shackles of unadvisable past things‘ on the Internet and correct past actions.
10.2 Issues
While there is an obvious need for the possibility to erase damaging data, this right should not amount to rewriting history. It is essential that this right is balanced against other fundamental rights like the freedom of expression or freedom of the press. Additionally, it is necessary to clarify which parties are required to act when the erasure of data is being requested.
(i) Conflict with freedom of speech
In a widely cited blog post, Peter Fleischer, chief privacy counsel of Google, noted that the right to be forgotten, as discussed in Europe, often covers three separate categories, each of which proposes progressively greater threats to free speech.641
a. ―If I post something online, do I have the right to delete it?‖
b. ―If I post something, and someone else copies it and re-posts it on their own site, do I have the right to delete it?‖
c. ―If someone else posts something about me, do I have a right to delete it?‖
Therefore, the issue at hand is to what extent can the right to be forgotten be compatible with the right to freedom of speech and expression – whether it will cover only category one, or will it cover both category one and two, or will it cover all three categories.
According to the EU GDPR, when someone demands the erasure of personal data, an Internet Service Provider ―shall have the obligation to erase personal data without undue delay‖, unless the retention of the data is necessary for exercising ―the right of freedom of expression.‖642 In another section, the regulation creates an exemption from the duty to remove data for ―the processing of personal data for journalistic purposes, or for the purposes of academic, artistic or literary expression.‖643
However, the exact scope and contours of such a right to be forgotten will only be clearly visible after the EU GDPR comes into force in 2018.
(ii) Compliance of Third Parties
While formulating a right to be forgotten, it is essential to outline whether third party providers of information—eg: search engines—can be held accountable for failing to comply with erasure requests.
This issue was addressed in the Google Spain Case.644In this case, the issue before the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) concerned an order from Spain‘s highest court, Audiencia Nacional, to Google requiring it to delete information concerning a Spanish citizen‘s financial problems from its search engine results. In this case, the argument that processing of data by Google Inc. (based in the US) for operating Google Search was not subject to EU law was rejected by the CJEU. The Court held that this processing was in the context of the activities of Google Spain, an establishment in the Union, despite the fact that it was only operating in the area of advertising. On this basis, the CJEU found that the Data Protection Directive was applicable to that particular case and held that search engines were indeed data controllers that needed to remove personal data that met the criteria for a ‗right to be forgotten‘.
This judgment essentially invokes long arm jurisdiction to hold the parent entity of a subsidiary company liable for processing of data related to an EU entity and subject. However, practical issues of compliance remains as the links to the Spanish article will be removed from Google Spain (and maybe, all Google subsidiaries in the EU) but it will be available on other jurisdictions which do not recognise the right to be forgotten such as the US (in Google US) to people disguising their location using a Virtual Private Network (popularly known as a VPN).645
However, this judgment comes with its own repercussions. The decision potentially allowed individuals to seek erasure of information made available by a number of other providers of social networking and information services.
10.3 International Practices
European Union
The EU GDPR has chosen to recognise the right to be forgotten;646 however, it has done so while acknowledging the social ramifications of obliterating all aspects of the past existence of certain data. According to the regulation, an individual who is no longer desirous of his personal data to be processed or stored would be able to erase it so long as the personal data is no longer necessary, relevant, or is incorrect and serves no legitimate interest.647 Thus, it would follow that the right cannot be exercised where the information/data is necessary; for exercising the right of freedom of expression and information, for compliance with legal obligations, for the performance of a task carried out in public interest, on the grounds of public interest in the area of public health, for archiving purposes in the public interest, scientific or historical research purposes or statistical purposes, or for the exercise or defence of legal claims.648 Under the EU GDPR, the decision on whether the right to erasure can be exercised, is to be taken by the data controller.649
The quantum of fine that is applicable to the data controller if such an entity takes an incorrect view or otherwise infringes Article 17 of the EU GDPR (right to erasure) may amount to 20 million euros or up to four percent of the total worldwide annual turnover of the preceding financial year, whichever is higher.650 [KSP: Why does it say that the decision on whether the right to erasure can be exercised by the data controller when it will be subject to a fine if it does not do so?]
Canada
Schedule 1, Principle 5 of PIPEDA provides the deletion of personal information that is no longer required.651 Further, organisations are mandated to develop guidelines and implement procedures. Though PIPEDA allows the erasure of personal information to a certain extent, it is often criticised for including loopholes that allow freedom of speech to outweigh the right to be forgotten. It is thought that the right to be forgotten cannot be shoehorned into existing privacy law because search engines do not come within the scope of PIPEDA and the activity of indexing newsworthy content online is subject to the journalism exception in PIPEDA. Furthermore, any attempt to compel a search engine to not include particular results particularly pointing to lawful content- falls foul of the freedom of expression right under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.652
South Africa
Section 24 of the POPI Act states that personal information may only be stored or used to the extent it is adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to its purpose.653 Although POPI Act does not explicitly grant a right to be forgotten, Section 24 allows data subjects to request responsible parties to correct or delete personal information or records.654
The right to be forgotten in POPI Act only allows for deletion of personal information that is ―inaccurate, irrelevant, excessive, out-of-date, incomplete, misleading or obtained unlawfully.‖ In addition, the act also requires responsible parties to delete or destroy records that should no longer be retained.655
10.4 Provisional Views
1. The right to be forgotten may be incorporated within the data protection framework for India as has been adverted to by the Supreme Court in Puttaswamy. Further, international practices in the EU GDPR and Canada also envisage a right to be forgotten in some form or manner thus strengthening the case for its incorporation.
2. The right to be forgotten should be designed in such a manner that it adequately balances the right to freedom of speech and expression with the right to privacy. The scope and contours of such a right may be determined in accordance with the capabilities of the data controllers to undertake the balancing exercise and determine the legitimacy of the request. Further, clear parameters on the basis of which a controller will carry out the balancing exercise may be incorporated in the law to enable them to effectively carry out this exercise. A residuary role for a sector regulator to develop particular guidelines for each sector may become necessary.
10.5 Questions
1. What are your views on the right to be forgotten having a place in India‘s data protection law?
2. Should the right to be forgotten be restricted to personal data that individuals have given out themselves?
3. Does a right to be forgotten add any additional protection to data subjects not already available in other individual participation rights?
4. Does a right to be forgotten entail prohibition on display/dissemination or the erasure of the information from the controller‘s possession?
5. Whether a case-to-case balancing of the data subject‘s rights with controller and public interests is a necessary approach for this right? Who should perform this balancing exercise? If the burden of balancing rests on the data controller as it does in the EU, is it fair to also impose large penalties if the said decision is deemed incorrect by a data protection authority or courts?
6. Whether special exemptions (such as the right to freedom of expression and information) are needed for this right? (over and above possible general exemptions such as national security, research purposes and journalistic or artistic expression)?
7. Are there any alternative views on this?
630 Viktor Mayer-Schonberger, ‗Delete: The virtue of forgetting in the digital age‘ (Princeton University Press, 2011).
631 Frank La Rue, ‗Report of the Human Rights Council‘s Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression‘, 19, (A/HRC/17/27) (16 May 2011), available at: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/17session/A.HRC.17.27_en.pdf, (last accessed 28 October 2017).
632 Snyder v. Millersville University No. 07-1660, (2008) WL 5093140; See Yang Wang et al., ‗I regretted the minute I pressed share: A Qualitative Study of Regrets on Facebook‘, Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security, Pittsburgh, (July 20–22, 2011), available at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?rep=rep1&type=pdf&doi=10.1.1.207.8881, (last accessed 28 October 2017).
633 Balsley v. LFP, Inc No. 1:08 CV 491, (2011) WL 1298i80.
634 See Charles J. Sykes, ‗The End of Privacy‘ 221 (1999, Macmillan); Jonathan Zittrain, ‗The Future of the Internet-and How to Stop It‘ (Yale University Press, 2008); Jeffrey Rosen, ‗The Web Means the End of Forgetting‘, New York Times Magazine (21 July 2010), available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/25/magazine/25privacy-t2.html?pagewanted=all, (last accessed 25 October 2017).
635 James Boyle, ‗Shamans, Software, and Spleens: Law and the Construction of the Information Society‘ (Harvard University Press, 1996); Helen Nissenbaum, ‗Privacy in Context-Technology, Policy, and the Integrity of Social Life‘, 36, (Stanford University Press, 2010).
636 Google Spain SL and Google Inc. v. Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD) and Mario Costeja González, Case C131/12, (2014), European Court of Justice.
637 Sri Vasunathan v. The Registrar General, 2017 SCC OnLine Kar 424.
638 Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.)& Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., (2017) 10 SCALE 1.
639 Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.)& Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., (2017) 10 SCALE 1 at Paragraph 65; See, Ravi Antani, ‗The Resistance of memory: Could the European Union‘s Right to be Forgotten exist in the United States?‘ 30 Berkeley Tech Law Journal 1173 (2015), available at: http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/btlj/vol30/iss4/20/, (last accessed 21 October 2017).
640 Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.)& Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., (2017) 10 SCALE 1.
641 Jeffrey Rosen, ‗The Right to be Forgotten‘ 64 Stanford Law Review 90 (February 2012).
642 Article 17, EU GDPR.
643 Article 85, EU GDPR.
644 Google Spain SL and Google Inc. v. Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD) and Mario Costeja González, Case C131/12, (2014), European Court of Justice.
645 Klint Finley, ‗In Europe you will need a VPN to see real search results‘, Wired (8 March 2016), available at: https://www.wired.com/2016/03/europe-youll-need-vpn-see-real-google-search-results/, (last accessed 28 October 2017).
646 Michael L. Rustad, Sanna Kulevska, ‗Reconceptualising the right to be forgotten to enable transatlantic data flow‘, 28(2) Harvard Journal of Law & Technology 349 (2015).
647 Article 17, EU GDPR.
648 Article 17, EU GDPR.
649 Article 17, EU GDPR.
650 Article 83, EU GDPR.
651 Schedule 1, Principle 5 of PIPEDA; Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, ‗Schedule 1, Principle 5 of PIPEDA; Personal Information Retention and Disposal: Principles and Best Practices‘ (June 2014), available at: https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/privacy-topics/safeguarding-personal-information/gd_rd_201406/ ,(last accessed 28 October 2017).
652 David T.S. Fraser, ‗You‘d better forget the right to be forgotten in Canada‘ (April 2016), available at: http://blog.privacylawyer.ca/2016/04/youd-better-forget-right-to-be.html, (last accessed 28 October 2017) cited in Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, ‗Submissions received for the consultation on Online Reputation‘, available at: https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/about-the-opc/what-we-do/consultations/consultation-ononline-reputation/submissions-received-for-the-consultation-on-online-reputation/or/sub_or_07/ (last accessed 21 November 2017).
653 Section 24, POPI Act. 654 Section 24, POPI Act. 655Andrew Weeks, ‗The Right to Be Forgotten in South Africa‘, Michalsons (26 March 2013), available at: https://www.michalsons.com/blog/the-right-to-be-forgotten/11868, (last accessed 28 October 2017).
From: Jyoti Panday [mailto:jyoti....@eff.org]
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 9:43 PM
To: 박경신 <kyungs...@korea.ac.kr>
Subject: Data protection framework india
http://meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/white_paper_on_data_protection_in_india_171127_final_v2.pdf
-- Jyoti PandayAsia Policy Fellow Electronic Frontier Foundationhttps://eff.orgjyoti....@eff.org
lorena jaume
Dear KS,
many thanks, indeed, this is something we should try to work until our meeting and finish with polishing until the 29th the latest.
I think it would be good to address how in other countries this is working and what side effects and problematic questions this may open.
We only have 60 minutes for our DC Pub, hence I wonder whether we could try to split the session in 2 parts (which is by far not ideal, but could help us at least to structure the work to be done).
1- Quick review of the international survey and possible cooperation partners
2- Statement draft for the Indian case
What do you all think?
Warm regards,
Lorena
Lorena Jaume-Palasí
Cel. + 49 (0) 179 9119 578
Enviado: lunes, 18 de diciembre de 2017 04:02 p. m.
Para: 'Dynamic Coalition on Publicness'
Asunto: action on india; FW: Data protection framework india
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dynamic Coalition on Publicness" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to publicness+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to publi...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/publicness.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/publicness/015a01d37811%24355582d0%24a0008870%24%40korea.ac.kr.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Kyung Sin Park
AnjaThanks and best,The Internet Democracy Project will be submitting responses. Happy to coordinate on the right to be forgotten question.Hi all,Just to let you know that the submission date was moved to 31 January yesterday.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dynamic Coalition on Publicness" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to publicness+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to publi...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/publicness.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/publicness/015a01d37811%24355582d0%24a0008870%24%40korea.ac.kr.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--Dr. Anja Kovacs
The Internet Democracy Project
+91 9899028053 | @anjakovacs
https://internetdemocracy.in/
http://genderingsurveillance.in
lorena jaume
Dear all, dear KS,
hm, we may need to talk about coordination for the Indian case also, but sure we could debate a joint statement. I think it would be important to have a meeting in advance though. We only have 60 min for the DC Pub. Is there a possibility to seat perhapst tomorrow 16-17hours in a bilateral meeting with reps from DC Gender and prepare the DC Pub session a bit in advance? Or after hours at hour drinks meeting at MR. Pickwicks?
Regards to all
Lorena
Lorena Jaume-Palasí
Cel. + 49 (0) 179 9119 578
Enviado: martes, 19 de diciembre de 2017 05:21 p. m.
Para: Anja Kovacs; publi...@googlegroups.com
Asunto: [DC Gender joint stmt]Re: action on india; FW: Data protection framework india
To post to this group, send email to publi...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/publicness.
kyungs...@korea.ac.kr
Dear all, happy new year!
I would like to introduce two new members of DC Publicness copied here. Sunil has been a long-time friend and activist/researcher in Center for Internet and Society in Bangalore who has been influential in data governance discourse in South, and Winston and I worked together on the 3-year-long-worked Synthesis Document of APrIGF which includes an important blob (para. 25) about RTBF from Asian perspectives. http://rigf.asia/documents/APrIGF_2017_Bangkok_Synthesis_Document-FINAL.pdf (Lorena, can you please add them to the mail group? Winston may have already signed up.)
Also, please find attached a summary of points that I mentioned at the DC Gender and Internet Governance meeting to be included in a possible joint statement between the two DCs. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DTm1UJwg3dHdKOldJOt_aGlL6wcDJil9yTLSn4Dpkao/edit?usp=sharing Please feel free to edit or comment.
Finally, thank you so much for coming to our first DC Pub’s First Night at Pub, where the properly nourished members of DC Pub went on to dance away at APC Party. I was thinking that we should make it a tradition to have a DC Pub pre-APC party at every IGF/RightsCON.
Yours truly,
KS Park
lorena jaume
Dear all, dear KS,
happy new year to you as well and welcome Sunil and Winston!
KS very important:
what deadlines do we have for the Indian Statemen? Anja Kovacs wanted to submitt a first draft. Afaik the submission deadlines finishes on the 31st of January right?
For the Joint Statement with the DC Gender, would it make sense to also open the draft to the DC Gender and see where we can get?
@KS does it make sense to schedule a call with the DC Gender by the 20th of January after two weeks of comments?
I think it also makes sense to set similar dates since it can also be used by the DC Gender for a statement towards the Indian situation. What do you all think?
I owe you a summary of our session at the IGF, which will be due the latest this Friday. Apologies for the delay.
Warm regards to all,
Lorena
Lorena Jaume-Palasí
Cel. + 49 (0) 179 9119 578
Enviado: miércoles, 3 de enero de 2018 06:13 p. m.
Para: publi...@googlegroups.com
CC: sunila...@gmail.com; wrob...@caverock.net.nz
Asunto: RE: [DC Gender joint stmt]Re: action on india; FW: Data protection framework india
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to publicness+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to publi...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/publicness.
kyungs...@korea.ac.kr
Lorena, see below.
Also, can you also add Celina Bottino (Beatriz) cel...@itsrio.org to our group mail? She actually joined back in March in Brussels but I misplaced her email address till now. Sorry for a mishap.
From: publi...@googlegroups.com [mailto:publi...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of lorena jaume
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2018 10:25 AM
To: kyungs...@korea.ac.kr; publi...@googlegroups.com
Cc: sunila...@gmail.com; wrob...@caverock.net.nz
Subject: Re: [DC Gender joint stmt]Re: action on india; FW: Data protection framework india
Dear all, dear KS,
happy new year to you as well and welcome Sunil and Winston!
KS very important:
what deadlines do we have for the Indian Statemen? Anja Kovacs wanted to submitt a first draft. Afaik the submission deadlines finishes on the 31st of January right?
– KS: correct. January 31. Can someone do a draft first so that people can add to it?
For the Joint Statement with the DC Gender, would it make sense to also open the draft to the DC Gender and see where we can get?
@KS does it make sense to schedule a call with the DC Gender by the 20th of January after two weeks of comments?
- KS: Bikhasha, one of our own, is leading DC Gender. I will let her speak on both of this.
I think it also makes sense to set similar dates since it can also be used by the DC Gender for a statement towards the Indian situation. What do you all think?
- KS: I do not know whether DC Gender will be submitting anything to Indian authorities. But, I will also let Bikhasha speak.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/publicness/DB6PR10MB1814FF43A64B7373ECDF6782D5110%40DB6PR10MB1814.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.
Bishakha Datta
Based on this we can then figure out if we can use this as a basis to submit to Indian authorities.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to publicness+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to publi...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/publicness.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/publicness/004001d384b6%242b13f980%24813bec80%24%40korea.ac.kr.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dynamic Coalition on Publicness" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to publicness+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to publi...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/publicness.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/publicness/DB6PR10MB1814FF43A64B7373ECDF6782D5110%40DB6PR10MB1814.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dynamic Coalition on Publicness" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to publicness+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to publi...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/publicness.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/publicness/00aa01d389e0%2465cdc4a0%2431694de0%24%40korea.ac.kr.
kyungs...@korea.ac.kr
Lorena Jaume-Palasí
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dynamic Coalition on Publicness" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to publicness+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to publi...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/publicness.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/publicness/4E30B438-8722-4C2F-8597-137C8F223845%40korea.ac.kr.
kyungs...@korea.ac.kr
Folks, I think that we gave ourselves enough time to edit the proposed text of DC Publicness-Gender joint statement. Smita, please just circulate the text now among DC Gender members.
Also, we need to act fast on giving opinion on the Indian proposal. Any volunteer to do a draft? I think we can recycle our foundational document and add this DC Gender draft.
KS
P.S. Lorena, can you confirm whether Sunil and Winston are added to the mail group? I will then stop adding their individual email addresses.
From: 'Lorena Jaume-Palasí' via Dynamic Coalition on Publicness [mailto:publi...@googlegroups.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 6:39 PM
To: kyungsinpark <kyungs...@korea.ac.kr>
Cc: Smita Vanniyar <sm...@pointofview.org>; Bishakha Datta <bish...@pointofview.org>; lorena jaume <lja...@hotmail.com>; Dynamic Coalition on Publicness <publi...@googlegroups.com>; sunila...@gmail.com; Winston Roberts <wrob...@caverock.net.nz>
Subject: Re: [DC Gender joint stmt]Re: action on india; FW: Data protection framework india
Dear all,
thanks for the feedback so far. Celina and Smita have been added.
@all please use the comment function to make text suggestions, otherwise it will be difficult to consolidate any suggestions into a meaningful text.
Warm regards
Lorena
2018-01-11 10:11 GMT+01:00 <kyungs...@korea.ac.kr>:
Thank you but before sharing w DC Gender, can we get DC Pub members to give an approval (even if silent) that it is a workable doc to start talking w DC Gender on?
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DTm1UJwg3dHdKOldJOt_aGlL6wcDJil9yTLSn4Dpkao/edit?usp=sharing (copied here again)
All DC Pub members, please give your input on G-doc or here by, say, this Friday 12 midnight PST.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 11, 2018, at 01:05, Smita Vanniyar <sm...@pointofview.org> wrote:
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dynamic Coalition on Publicness" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to publicness+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to publi...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/publicness.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/publicness/4E30B438-8722-4C2F-8597-137C8F223845%40korea.ac.kr.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dynamic Coalition on Publicness" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to publicness+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to publi...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/publicness.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/publicness/CAEPc%3DLY3dxXQaSvxesGVGzXADzmiODQFAAj%2BdTC-_NZpzA5CVw%40mail.gmail.com.
lorena jaume
Dear all, dear KS,
yes, I did confirm the subscription to the mailing list of Sunil and Winston. I also added some comments to the text, many thanks KS for doing the draft. I think it would be important to make clear, that the DC gender is also about LGBT community, right? Or am I getting it wrong? I think it would be helpful to reflect this.
I specially love this paragraph
"What must be done is vigorous prosecution and legislation of existing norms protecting women: anti-discrimination law, laws on violent sexual crimes, laws on non-consensual distribution of sexual images, and hate speech laws. Rather, RTBF interferes with such efforts by allowing perpetrators to suppress evidence and their ethical discourse about their conduct before they are brought to legal scrutiny"
For the Indian draft I thought Anja Kovacs had volunteered to do something. There are a few new updates on the RTBF, I think we should recycle the statement and also add to new aspects such as jurisdiction. What do you think? I can deliver one to paragraphs as a draft, but not more.
Thanks so much for this!
Warmly
Lorena
Lorena Jaume-Palasí
Cel. + 49 (0) 179 9119 578
Para: publi...@googlegroups.com
CC: sunila...@gmail.com; 'Winston Roberts'
Asunto: RE: [DC Gender joint stmt]Re: action on india; FW: Data protection framework india
Smita Vanniyar
When do you want to close suggestions from the DC members? End of the week is okay?
Folks, I think that we gave ourselves enough time to edit the proposed text of DC Publicness-Gender joint statement. Smita, please just circulate the text now among DC Gender members.
Also, we need to act fast on giving opinion on the Indian proposal. Any volunteer to do a draft? I think we can recycle our foundational document and add this DC Gender draft.
KS
P.S. Lorena, can you confirm whether Sunil and Winston are added to the mail group? I will then stop adding their individual email addresses.
From: 'Lorena Jaume-Palasí' via Dynamic Coalition on Publicness [mailto:publicness@googlegroups.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 6:39 PM
To: kyungsinpark <kyungs...@korea.ac.kr>
Cc: Smita Vanniyar <sm...@pointofview.org>; Bishakha Datta <bish...@pointofview.org>; lorena jaume <lja...@hotmail.com>; Dynamic Coalition on Publicness <publi...@googlegroups.com>; sunila...@gmail.com; Winston Roberts <wrob...@caverock.net.nz>
Subject: Re: [DC Gender joint stmt]Re: action on india; FW: Data protection framework india
Dear all,
thanks for the feedback so far. Celina and Smita have been added.
@all please use the comment function to make text suggestions, otherwise it will be difficult to consolidate any suggestions into a meaningful text.
Warm regards
Lorena
2018-01-11 10:11 GMT+01:00 <kyungs...@korea.ac.kr>:
Thank you but before sharing w DC Gender, can we get DC Pub members to give an approval (even if silent) that it is a workable doc to start talking w DC Gender on?
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DTm1UJwg3dHdKOldJOt_aGlL6wcDJil9yTLSn4Dpkao/edit?usp=sharing (copied here again)
All DC Pub members, please give your input on G-doc or here by, say, this Friday 12 midnight PST.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 11, 2018, at 01:05, Smita Vanniyar <sm...@pointofview.org> wrote:
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dynamic Coalition on Publicness" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to publicness+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to publi...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/publicness.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/publicness/4E30B438-8722-4C2F-8597-137C8F223845%40korea.ac.kr.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dynamic Coalition on Publicness" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to publicness+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to publi...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/publicness.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/publicness/CAEPc%3DLY3dxXQaSvxesGVGzXADzmiODQFAAj%2BdTC-_NZpzA5CVw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dynamic Coalition on Publicness" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to publicness+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to publi...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/publicness.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/publicness/001f01d39037%24ec2ba280%24c482e780%24%40korea.ac.kr.
kyungs...@korea.ac.kr
Anja Kovacs
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/publicness/EBD52C12-4BAE-461F-B56C-0A92EE1AF29F%40korea.ac.kr.
--