Tracey


I took this from Panopticon Blog concerning the outcome of the Google order. Now what if the rights of the Swedish citizen was to be escalated to the EU courts, would the outcome be the same?

“The first question for the CJEU was whether Google was a data controller for the purposes of Directive 95/46. Going against the opinion of the Advocate General (see earlier post), the Court held that the collation, retrieval, storage, organisation and disclosure of data undertaken by a search engine when a search is performed amounted to “processing” within the meaning of the Directive; and that as Google determined the purpose and means of that processing, it was indeed the controller. This is so regardless of the fact that such data is already published on the internet and is not altered by Google in any way.

The Court went on to find that the activity of search engines makes it easy for any internet user to obtain a structured overview of the information available about an individual thereby enabling them to establish a detailed profile of that person involving a vast number of aspects of his private life. This entails a significant interference with rights to privacy and to data protection, which could not be justified by the economic interests of the search engine operator. In a further remark that will send shockwaves through many commercial operators providing search services, it was said that as a “general rule” the data subject’s rights in this regard will override “not only the economic interest of the operator of the search engine but also the interest of the general public in finding that information upon a search relating to the data subject’s name” (at paras 81 and 97).”

Reblog from post in 2009. Very relevant to the Tracey series.

Virtual Shadows

I was surprised when taking a coffee with one of my colleagues in the office. She received an SMS thanks from another of our colleagues her for the birthday greeting. When I asked her, how did she know, she said she found it online at http://www.birthday.se/kontakta-oss/Default.aspx. She then told me when my birthday was and even a map to where I lived (although they did get this wrong). Nevertheless surprise became horror. I had already removed my details from www.hitta.se only to find myself at another site. So I checked with a previous colleague of mine (Martin Da Fonseca) that studied security law in Sweden if this was in fact legal? And this was his response.

“It is legal. The service provided by Upplysning.se is regulated in Kreditupplysningslagen (credit information legislation) (1973:1173).

I believe the service provided by birthday.se is using (or exploiting) the fact that this information is…

View original post 419 more words

I am on a crusade.

I am fed-up of finding my personal information being spread all over Sweden by government authorities. There are laws concerning the protection of personal privacy that are not being enforced. I plan to fix this. I have written a letter to the Datainspektion, and started posting on this thread (Tracey). In parallel is a series called “My name is Tracey” on YouTube, Part #1 uploaded today. If you want to help, Like and Share to your hearts content wherever you happen to pick this up. I have a plan on how to succeed, and you are a part of the plan…

If you are Swedish, are you not concerned who maybe using your identity to purchase something online and then pick up your purchase with a false id-card? You should be, di.se is reporting on this, read more here.

Why do I claim that Sweden is easy picking for identity thieves? Look at yesterdays post. If you are a Swedish resident, the first 6 digits of the 10 digits that comprise your personal id number is public domain in Sweden. Doesn’t that make you just a weeny-teeny little bit uncomfortable?