Law
Enforcement Access to Your Personal Data: A Roundtable Discussion with Ginger McCall from the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
Not exact matches
Ever since its DRI case, the Court has developed a strong focus on the guarantees concerning the
access to personal data by law
enforcement authorities and the AG had
to adapt the requirements of the Court
to PNR schemes.
Because JAMS provides alternative dispute resolution mechanisms that operate in accordance with judicial procedures, we may also deny or limit
access to personal data in the following contexts: (i) interference with law
enforcement or with private causes of action, including the prevention, investigation or detection of offenses or the right
to a fair trial, arbitration or mediation; (ii) disclosure where the legitimate rights or important interests of others would be violated; (iii) breaching a legal or other professional privilege or obligation; (iv) prejudicing employee security investigations or grievance proceedings or in connection with employee succession planning and corporate reorganizations; or (v) prejudicing the confidentiality necessary in monitoring, inspection or regulatory functions connected with sound management, or in future or ongoing negotiations involving JAMS.
The review was split into two sections: commercial aspects of the Privacy Shield and the derogations allowing Law
Enforcement and National Security
to access personal data.
This post will focus on the
data breach question — whether unauthorized
access to personal information, in the absence of hacking, qualifies as a «
data breach» for the purposes of state
data breach notification laws, and potentially Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
data security
enforcement.