What will be the impact of digital measures in front of Twitter, Google and Facebook?
For example, Facebook acts to have published data. Even if the person concerned closes their account, it systematically stores all personal data on its servers. This is wrong for Europe, but not for American law.
Respect for the digital right to be forgotten and the right to portability of personal data concerns only community actors or foreign actors represented in the European Union.
It is the emergence of Cloud, a perfect example of communication's victory over the law.
It argues that individuals' personal data is no longer collected on a private computer, but in remote data centers that users access over the internet.
It is the Cloud service provider, mostly located outside the European Union, which retains some control over the processing of the data and thus stands between it and the data controller.
It plays a difficult role to frame. How can we imagine that these companies would voluntarily submit to European data protection law?
The use of a one stop service should help identify the competent administrative authority to carry out the procedures. The country where the company's parent company is located is important.
But using the one-stop service has already revealed the limits. Implementation with cloud provider is ineffective.
The concept of parent organization remains unclear. The technical and organizational environment produced by Cloud precludes any protection of personal data transferred outside the EU.
Data may be protected in one country or even a group of countries (EU) and jointly deprived of any protection in another country (eg Paraguay) or another regional group. These areas are actually turned into paradise.
So, what arbitration should be established when the laws of one country conflict with the laws of another country.
An Unlimited World
The Internet allows for the unlimited collection, use and trade of private data. The speed and features of data circulation support this internationalization.
How can we legitimately and effectively demand Community legislation vis-à-vis the rest of the world in this context?
The web raises questions about the effectiveness of improper regulation due to the architecture and planetary nature of data circulation.
The Internet is escaping the framework of nation-state and regional integration blocks. The Web is a perfect realm of the global, extraterritorial, and intangible that goes beyond the territorial dimensions of national or regional rules of law.
Another disruptive factor is that the internet is not managed by any authority and crosses borders with no or few controls.
The most problematic observation is the plethora of enforceable rights. Indeed, the network does not have a fixed or single center. Thus, it uses the principle of mobility of centers.
Therefore, there is a significant gap between the law as designed and the reality of the current world regarding the protection of personal data in global networks.
The direct link that still exists today between the concepts of state, sovereignty, law and territory is clearly undermined by regulations on the protection of personal data.
The electronic media does not contain any geographical references. This is due, on the one hand, to the structure of the Internet, which is characterized by its complexity.
Computers are connected using the TCP/IP communication protocol, and each computer has a dynamic or static IP address that identifies it.
During their connection, it is important whether there is information about the identity and location of the network to which the Internet user's computer is connected, or the identity of the computer in question.
On the other hand, packets or datagrams, whose fragmentation and reconstruction are performed by the TCP protocol, move independently, thanks to the action that redirects them in a random order according to the information of the receiver.
Not in the network and IP address of the recipient's computer, the latter has only the task of delivering them to their destination.
This technological context creates particular difficulties of binding to a particular regulation and associated conditions for capturing this data. It leads to situations that rebel against any protection of personal data.
How can we not question the ability to protect the privacy of Internet users?
There are also two opposing understandings when it comes to the methods of protecting personal data.
In the United States, some would like to see these files copyrighted. In the EU, this data remains the property of the person from whom it originates. The creator of the file is just a simple custodian.
These differences significantly worsen the possibility of eventual consensus on the protection of this data.
Dr.Yaşam Ayavefe
Yorum Yazın