英国1998年人权法案

英国1998年人权法案@梁淑英~~     

The new German Data Protection Act and its compatibility with the European Data Protection Directive

A substitution of the right to maintain mailing lists for marketing purposes (the so-called list privilege) by a strict opt-in requirement as proposed by the German Government for the amendment of the German Data Protection Act does not conform with European law. Making the use of relatively innocuous data like name and address for marketing purposes subject to the data subject's declaration of consent infringes upon the requirements of the European Data Protection Directive. The Directive allows for the use of personal data either on the basis of a data subject's declaration of consent or after a balancing of legally protected interests. Reducing this two-track model to a one-track model (based on the data subject's declaration of consent only) does not do justice to the idea of balancing of interests or free movement of goods and services which are a mandatory part of European law. The draft bill interferes drastically with the free movement of goods and services. A tightening of the opt-in requirements would be a severe burden for the German economy because it is impossible for businesses to distribute their goods and services without the help of marketing measures. The economic cycle would be hit at its weakest point, i.e. the link between businesses and consumers which is gaining more and more importance especially with a view to cross-border competition.     

Special report on labor and employment. Provider obligations under the Drug-Free Workplace Act

In view of the sanctions that may be taken by government agencies against employers, all providers should take their obligations under the Act seriously. The first step for each provider is to determine if it is subject to the Act or to any analogous state statutes. If so, the provider should take steps, if it has not already done so, to comply with the Act or applicable state legislation. While the Act has been criticized as a matter of social policy for not going further to prevent substance abuse in the workplace--by, for example, mandating drug testing or requiring sanctions against employees without the prerequisite of a criminal conviction--there is no question that the penalties it authorizes against employers do go far enough to warrant careful compliance with the Act's provisions.     

A Tort-Based Approach to Damages under the Human Rights Act 1998

This article argues that a strong case can be made for departing from the current approach to damages under the Human Rights Act 1998, and for the adoption of an alternative tort-based approach. The article critically analyses the English courts' arguments against adopting a tort-based approach and demonstrates that neither the Act nor the European Convention on Human Rights militate against such approach. It makes a positive case for a tort-based approach, arguing that the law of damages in tort provides an appropriate model for damages under the Act as a matter of principle given the common functions and protected interests that underpin both areas of the law. Further, tort law offers an established and elaborate corpus of principles to draw on, which can readily and naturally be read across to the human rights context. A tort-based approach would also promote consistency across English law, while generally affording greater protection to human rights than the English courts' current approach.     

The Vessel Hull Design Protection Act of 1998: is it still afloat?

Legal context. The Vessel Hull Design Protection Act (‘VHDPA’or ‘Act’) is a unique form of industrial designprotection under US law, part of the Digital Millennium CopyrightAct 1998. Congress provided this sui generis form of protectionin response to the Supreme Court's decision in Bonito Boatsv Thunder Craft Boats, Inc. This statute has been underutilizeddue to the difficulty in proving infringement, as unintendedconsequences were caused by the way ‘hull’ was originallydefined under the Act. A bill is pending in Congress that addresseshow a ‘hull’ is defined, eliminating any inclusionof ‘deck’ features, when passed, registrants shouldbe able to pursue infringers with greater success. Key points. The recreational boat manufacturing industry hasbeen plagued by low-cost boat makers who think nothing of takinga competitor's boat hull design, and using it as a ‘plug’to make a casting for their own unauthorized manufacturing use,a counterfeiting technique known in the trade as ‘splashing’a hull. In the eight years since enactment, the boating industryhas generally overlooked this form of intellectual propertyprotection due to the difficulty in proving infringement—thatis likely to change soon. Practical significance. The Act includes the right to excludeothers from making, having made, importing, offering for sale,or using in any trade, any boat hull embodying the protectedhull design. The Act provides compensatory recovery for damagesas well as injunctive relief. The newly revised Act has thepotential to provide a low-cost and effective form of intellectualproperty protection for recreational boat manufacturers whobuild hulls from moulded fibreglass or similar materials.     

Son Of CDA: The Constitutionality Of The Child Online Protection Act Of 1998

In 1998, Congress passed a second law to regulate online content in the name of protecting children. Although the Child Online Protection Act is arguably a more narrowly tailored approach to protecting children from online indecency than the Communications Decency Act of 1996, the COPA still suppresses a large amount of speech that adults have a constitutional right to receive. This article explains the two laws, analyzes how courts have treated them and finds that while there are slight differences between the two laws, the courts have thus far held that these differences are insignificant compared to their shared constitutional defects. The article recommends that Congress stop attempting to enact laws that technology and parental control make unnecessary and that would harm freedom of expression.     

Bioinformatics and genetic privacy: The impact of the Personal Data Protection Act 2010

Bioinformatics refers to the practise of creation and management of genetic data using computational and statistical techniques. In Malaysia, data obtained from genomic studies, particularly for the purpose of disease identification produces a tremendous amount of information related to molecular biology. These data are created from DNA samples obtained from diagnostic and research purposes in genomic research institutes in Malaysia. As these data are processed, stored, managed and profiled using computer applications, an issue arises as to whether the principles of personal data privacy would be applicable to these activities. This paper commences with an illustration of the salient features of the Personal Data Protection Act 2010. The second part analyses the impact of the newly passed Personal Data Protection Act 2010 on the collection of DNA sample, the processing of data obtained from it and the profiling of such data. The third part of the paper considers whether the various personal data protection principles are applicable to the act of DNA profiling and the creation of bioinformatics.     

The Data Protection (Amendment) Act, 2003: the Data Protection Directive and its implications for medical research in Ireland

Directive 95/46/EC on the Protection of Individuals with regard to the Processing of Personal Data and on the Free Movement of Such Data has been transposed into national law and is now the Data Protection (Amendment) Act, 2003. The Directive and the transposing Act provide for new obligations to those processing data. The new obligation of primary concern is the necessity to obtain consent prior to the processing of data (Article 7, Directive 95/46/EC). This has caused much concern especially in relation to 'secondary data' or 'archived data'. There exist, what seem to be in the minds of the medical research community, two competing interests: (i) that of the need to obtain consent prior to processing data and (ii) the need to protect and foster medical research. At the same time as the introduction of the Act, other prior legislation, i.e. the Freedom of Information Act, 1997-2003, has encouraged candour within the doctor-patient relationship and the High Court in Ireland, in the case of Geoghegan v. Harris, has promulgated the 'reasonable-patient test' as being the correct law in relation to the disclosure of risks to patients. The court stated that doctors have a duty to disclose all material risks to patients. The case demonstrates an example of a move toward a more open medical relationship. An example of this rationale was also recently seen in the United Kingdom in the House of Lords decision in Chester v. Afshar. Within the medical research community in Ireland, the need to respect the autonomy of patients and research participants by providing information to such parties has also been observed (Sheikh A. A., 2000 and Irish Council for Bioethics, 2005). Disquiet has been expressed in Ireland and other jurisdictions by the medical research communities in relation to the exact working and meaning of the Directive and therefore the transposing Acts (Strobl et al). This may be due to the fact that, as observed by Beyleveld "The Directive makes no specific mention of medical research and, consequently, it contains no provisions for medical research as an explicitly delineated category." (Beyleveld D., 2004) This paper examines the Irish Act and discusses whether the concerns expressed are well-founded and if the Act is open to interpretation such that it would not hamper medical research and public health work.     

The Role of Parliamentary Intention in Adjudication under the Human Rights Act 1998

This essay gives more detailed content to the widespread viewthat the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) has changed the traditionalrole of parliamentary intention in statutory interpretation.It begins by outlining the various ways in which legislativeintent has featured in traditional (pre-HRA) statutory interpretation.This is followed by an examination of the interpretive principlesdeveloped by the senior judiciary under the HRA case-law, focusingon the extent to which they seem to depart from traditionalprinciples. It is argued that although the traditional roleof parliamentary intention is partly preserved post-HRA, theinterpretive obligation under s 3(1) HRA nonetheless shiftsthe interpretive focus away from what Parliament originallyintended in enacting the legislation under HRA scrutiny, towardsfulfilling the overriding goal of achieving compatibility withConvention rights. The final sections of the essay attempt toprovide an account of what is involved in this shift.     

大数据时代日本个人信息保护法探究

个人信息本来是极其隐私的事物,在大数据时代却时刻处于裸奔状态,时刻面临被侵犯的风险。特别在新冠肺炎疫情防控中,大数据技术发挥了重要作用,个人信息保护再次引起关注。整体而言,日本个人信息保护法以个人优先与公共优先的宗旨博弈为出发点,以个人信息的概念界定为基础,以个人信息权的保护为核心,以个人信息保护机构的...