Data Protection V's Freedom Of Information.

[tunstall birdman]

Where is the balance struck on Data protection and Freedom of information?

In today's day and age of the internet information is a powerful tool and affects us all. Apart from the government(EG tax office), councils, public/private sectors, etc, goodness know's who has hold our personal details?
When should personal(The individual) and private(Private/public companies,institutions,Go vernment, etc) information be held and passed on, and when should it remain confidential or not held at all even?
Google got their hands slapped for 'stealing' IP WI FI information. But there should be more regulation on who has access to information held and how it is shared by companies, I would start with marketing companies who get hold of individual phone numbers and do nuisance cold calling.
But also to add there should be information that the public should have more right's on seeing with regards to individuals and institutions.

The issue of information and what to do with it is like a double headed mule trying to pulling in both directions I think.

[Gideon Gungeon]

decent post mate

[tunstall birdman]

Originally Posted by Gideon Gungeon

decent post mate

Cheers I think I have a slight fear on who holds my personal information and to what purpose? Must be from the day's I thought my school records would prevent me getting a job as the school would tell potential employers I was a twat when asked by them

[Soz Marra]

You can ask anyone you know/think has information on you, exactly what they hold using a S.A.R (Subject Access Request). It'll cost, but they have to return all information they hold within 40 days (by law).

They should only hold enough information they need to carry out whatever task, and should destroy it when it's no longer required. But this doesn't really happen

[SexyMackem]

Originally Posted by Soz Marra

You can ask anyone you know/think has information on you, exactly what they hold using a S.A.R (Subject Access Request). It'll cost, but they have to return all information they hold within 40 days (by law).

unless the information is currently being used for crime prevention or fraud detection; or if disclosure in anyway could reveal processes used for such.

They should only hold enough information they need to carry out whatever task, and should destroy it when it's no longer required. But this doesn't really happen

unless the subject has granted the information to be stored or it is used for identity purposes.

[tunstall birdman]

Originally Posted by Soz Marra

You can ask anyone you know/think has information on you, exactly what they hold using a S.A.R (Subject Access Request). It'll cost, but they have to return all information they hold within 40 days (by law).

They should only hold enough information they need to carry out whatever task, and should destroy it when it's no longer required. But this doesn't really happen

This is my point.
And having to pay for it is a scandal, this exclude's poor people access and a voice I think.

[SexyMackem]

Originally Posted by tunstall birdman

This is my point.
And having to pay for it is a scandal, this exclude's poor people access and a voice I think.

depends on which organisation you're contacting mate. some searches can be a complete arse on.

[Soz Marra]

Originally Posted by tunstall birdman

This is my point.
And having to pay for it is a scandal, this exclude's poor people access and a voice I think.

If you can't afford £10 or so for a SAR, most companies probably don't hold any real information on you anyway

[tunstall birdman]

Originally Posted by Soz Marra

If you can't afford £10 or so for a SAR, most companies probably don't hold any real information on you anyway

It's not for me I am just raising an issue for debate