Download Presentation - Society of Corporate Compliance and Ethics

YOU ALREADY HAVE ZERO PRIVACY:
GET OVER IT! (1/26/99) SCOTT MCNEALY, FORMER CEO OF SUN MICROSYSTEMS
Professor Paul Fiorelli, J.D., M.B.A. , CCEP
Co-Director, Cintas Institute for Business Ethics
Xavier University
[email protected]
AGENDA
Right to Privacy
• US History
• EU Data Protection
Laws
• Gamesmanship
• Social Networking
• Testing
• Identity Theft
•
US
Right
to Privacy
Right to Privacy
EU
Right to
be Forgotten
Right to Privacy
Right to Privacy
Samuel Warren
and now the right to life has
come to mean the right to enjoy
life, -- the right to be let alone;
Louis D. Brandeis
dissent in Olmstead v. United States (1928)
Right to Privacy
January 22, 1973
Roe v. Wade
June 7, 1965
Griswold v. Connecticut
June 2, 2015
USA Freedom Act
June 2010
City of Ontario v. Quon
Right to Privacy
"Specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees
that help give them life and substance. Various guarantees create zones of privacy. . . . The Third
Amendment, in its prohibition against the quartering of soldiers 'in any house' in time of peace without
the consent of the owner, is another facet of that privacy. The Fourth Amendment explicitly affirms the
'right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable
searches and seizures.' The Fifth Amendment, in its Self-Incrimination Clause, enables the citizen to
create a zone of privacy which government may not force him to surrender to his detriment. The
Ninth Amendment provides: 'The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be
construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.'"
- United States Supreme Court in Griswold v. Connecticut, 1965.
January 22, 1973
Roe v. Wade
June 7, 1965
Griswold v. Connecticut
June 2, 2015
USA Freedom Act
June 2010
City of Ontario v. Quon
Right to Privacy
The Fourth Amendment forbids “unreasonable searches and seizures” and that provision guarantees the privacy,
dignity, and security of persons against arbitrary an invasive acts by officers of the government.
The Court's precedents have not definitively established how to determine when and whether an employee has a
reasonable expectation of privacy in the workplace. Cell phone and text messages -- and their and related
communications are so pervasive that some persons may consider them to be essential means or necessary
instruments for self-expression, even self identification. That might strengthen the case for an expectation of
privacy.
On the other hand, one could counter that employees who need cell phones or similar devices for personal
matters can purchase and pay for their own and employer policies concerning communications will of course
shape the reasonable expectations of their employees, especially to the extent that the employer policies are
clearly communicated.
We need not explore these matters further in this case however.
That is because even on the assumption that Quon had a reasonable expectation of privacy in his text messages,
January 22, 1973
the search was reasonable.
June 2, 2015
Roe v. Wade
June 7, 1965
Griswold v. Connecticut
USA Freedom Act
June 2010
City of Ontario v. Quon
Right to Privacy
January 22, 1973
Roe v. Wade
June 7, 1965
Griswold v. Connecticut
June 2, 2015
USA Freedom Act
June 2010
City of Ontario v. Quon
Right to Be Forgotten
Right to Be Forgotten
95/46/EC DIRECTIVE
PERSONAL DATA:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Processed fairly & lawfully
Obtained only for specific lawful purposes
Relevant, adequate, not excessive
Accurate
Not kept longer than necessary
Not transferred outside of the EEA (European
Economic Area) unless adequate protection in
place
5/13/2014
Right to be forgotten
1995
95/46/EC Directive
2018
EU GDP
2/29/2016
EU - US Privacy Shield
Right to Be Forgotten
5/13/2014
Right to be forgotten
1995
95/46/EC Directive
2018
EU GDP
2/29/2016
EU - US Privacy Shield
Right EUtoGeneral
Be Data
Forgotten
Protection Regulation (EU GDP)
• Regulations have uniformity across 28
member nations
• EU GDP replaces 95/46/EC in 2018
• Significantly higher fines for non-compliance
• Organizations must have a DPO (Data
Protection officer)
• Must have explicit consent by consumer to
use and transfer data
• Private information right to erasure
5/13/2014
Right to be forgotten
1995
95/46/EC Directive
2018
EU GDP
2/29/2016
EU - US Privacy Shield
GAMESMANSHIP:
Employee’s
Right to
Privacy
Privacy Issues in Social Networking
Employer’s
Need to
know
Drug & Nicotine Testing
Drug & Nicotine Testing
PROTECT YOUR DATA
SKIMMERS
PRETEXTING
FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, CONTACT
PAUL FIORELLI
[email protected]
(513)886-2050