Sentences with phrase «under federal privacy law»

Under federal privacy laws, a lawyer may disclose personal information of an individual to a third party so long as the lawyer obtains the individual's consent, and the third party is contractually bound to at least the minimum privacy standards as those promised by the lawyer to the individual, which are strict in the first place.

Not exact matches

Many details in the case remain murky, however, because of federal laws designed to protect the privacy of the researchers under scrutiny.

The Department of Education has issued simpler guidance for parents and educators aimed at clearing up widespread confusion about when information may be shared under the main federal student - privacy law.

These concerns have been heightened by two major developments: the U.S. Department of Education's relaxation of regulations under FERPA, the federal law governing student privacy; and the creation of massive databases by state education departments, in conjunction with the likes of Rupert Murdoch and Bill Gates.

ID Fraud Restoration SpecialistIf you are a victim of identity theft, IdentityIQ provides an expert Fraud Restoration Specialist to ensure your financial security, privacy, and your rights under state and federal law.

ID Fraud Restoration Specialist If you are a victim of identity theft, IdentityIQ provides an expert Fraud Restoration Specialist to ensure your financial security, privacy, and your rights under state and federal law.

any disclosure required by federal, state or local law, including disclosures under the Truth in Savings Act, Truth in Lending Act, Electronic Fund Transfer Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the financial privacy provisions of the Gramm - Leach - Bliley Act;

Focus on the Data provides unique insights and practical guidance on privacy and data security issues under international, federal, state and local laws.

In Royal Bank of Canada v. Trang [1] the Supreme Court of Canada took a practical and pragmatic approach to implied consent under the federal private sector privacy law, Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act [2](PIPEDA).

We argued that the residents» alleged claims were too individualized and unique to be adjudicated as a class, and pointed out that it would be impossible to determine the putative class members without expert review of thousands of individual medical charts, which is not permissible under HIPAA and other privacy federal and state laws, and statistics and surveys were no substitute to assess individual medical care.

The Commissioner is an advocate for the privacy rights of Canadians and her powers include: Investigating complaints, conducting audits and pursuing court action under two federal laws - Privacy Act and Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA); Publicly reporting on the personal information - handling practices of public and private sector organizations; Supporting, undertaking and publishing research into privacy issues; and Promoting public awareness and understanding of privacy privacy rights of Canadians and her powers include: Investigating complaints, conducting audits and pursuing court action under two federal laws - Privacy Act and Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA); Publicly reporting on the personal information - handling practices of public and private sector organizations; Supporting, undertaking and publishing research into privacy issues; and Promoting public awareness and understanding of privacy Privacy Act and Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA); Publicly reporting on the personal information - handling practices of public and private sector organizations; Supporting, undertaking and publishing research into privacy issues; and Promoting public awareness and understanding of privacy privacy issues; and Promoting public awareness and understanding of privacy privacy issues.

«Without an employee's written consent and voluntary waiver of rights of confidentiality and privacy,» the MBA's president told the MLGBA, «it would be unlawful under state and federal law to release confidential employee information; it would also be unethical.»

These Province - based rights may augment, strengthen, or otherwise somehow compliment any privacy rights you have inherently or under Federal law.

She has also advised clients subject to regulatory investigations and litigation involving a spectrum of federal and state laws, including under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), Gramm - Leach - Bliley Act (GLBA), state data breach notification laws, California Online Privacy Protection Act (CalOPPA) and federal and state laws, including under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), Gramm - Leach - Bliley Act (GLBA), state data breach notification laws, California Online Privacy Protection Act (CalOPPA) and Federal Trade Commission Act, the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), Gramm - Leach - Bliley Act (GLBA), state data breach notification laws, California Online Privacy Protection Act (CalOPPA) and others.

Under this new legislation, the Commissioner's Office is now required to regularly review the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre (FINTRAC's) compliance with the Privacy Act, the federal public sector privaPrivacy Act, the federal public sector privacyprivacy law.

Under section 1178 (a)(2)(B) of the Act and section 264 (c)(2) of HIPAA, provisions of state privacy laws that are contrary to and more stringent than the corresponding federal standard, requirement, or implementation specification are not preempted.

To the extent that states enact privacy laws that are stronger or more comprehensive than contrary federal requirements, they will presumably not be preempted under section 1178 (a)(2)(B).

Comment: A few commenters asserted that the requirement to include a statement in which the patient acknowledged that information used or disclosed to any entity other than a health plan or health care provider may no longer be protected by federal privacy law would be inconsistent with existing protections implemented by IRBs under the Common Rule.

The questions as to whether a state could enforce, or would be subject to penalties if it chose to continue to enforce, its own laws following a denial by the Secretary of an exception request under § 160.203 or a holding by a court of competent jurisdiction that a state privacy law had been preempted by a contrary federal privacy standard raise several issues.

On May 8, the federal, British Columbia, and Alberta privacy commissioners published new guidelines to remind organizations that under Canadian private - sector privacy laws, organizations are required to obtain meaningful consent for the collection, use, and disclosure of personal information.

The Federal Court of Canada released a landmark decision finding that the court has the jurisdiction to make an extra-territorial order with world - wide effects against a foreign resident requiring the foreign person to remove documents containing personal information about a Canadian citizen that violates the person's rights under Canada's privacy law, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA).

The decisions of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada under PIPEDA are subject to enforcement in some circumstances in the Federal Court, but only the court's order has force of law.

Authorized organizations and businesses that would like to access driving records must meet certain requirements under the Federal Driver's Privacy Protection Act and additional laws.

Following the Facebook - Cambridge Analytica revelations, there have been calls to reassess Canada's privacy laws to place political parties under federal legislation.

Organizations who are doing social media screening must make sure they are not basing their hiring decisions on protected characteristics including religious affiliation, national origin, sexual orientation, marital status or health conditions protected under state or federal anti-discrimination and privacy laws.

These reports qualify as «Consumer Reports» under the FCRA, the federal law promoting the accuracy and privacy of information in the files of the nation's credit reporting companies.

Standerwick also explains background screening performed by trained professional screeners is «subject to strict regulations under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, as well as federal, state and local privacy and consumer protection laws, and they are trained to properly handle personally identifiable information.»

In my opinion, the requirement to disclose competing offers under REBBA violates federal privacy laws and is unenforceable.