Re: [projectvrm] Re: [WG-UMA] The Death of Safe Harbor is the Ultimate VRM and UMA Legal Opportunity

[M a r y H o d d e r < >]

Withdrawing consent is an important right, whether a "human right" or not as 
classified in legal regimes. However, it's more subtle than just yes or no, 
you have it or you don't. Basically, you ought to be able to revoke consent 
going forward, but not backward, and if you shared data, it's possible there 
is a mechanism or right to remove data and actions with it. But those are the 
messy details and time, past, present, future changes the right or ability to 
revoke.

If end-users of systems cannot revoke consent going forward, they have no 
ability (depending on the context) to take their business elsewhere in 
future, or at least have their information trapped depending. I do think 
choice and autonomy are key to human freedom even if it's not classified 
legally as a human right.


On Oct 6, 2015, at 9:45 AM, Brian Behlendorf wrote:

> 
> People who publish Open Source software give irrevocable consents all the 
> time to share their IP - by necessity and without exception.  Where is an 
> irrevocable consent defined as alienating a human right?
> 
> Brian
> 
> 
> On Tue, 6 Oct 2015, Neiditz, Jon wrote:
>> You cannot give an irrevocable consent, because that would be attempting 
>> to alienate a “human right.”
>>  
>> Jon Neiditz
>> Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
>> Suite 2800 | 1100 Peachtree Street NE | Atlanta, GA 30309-4528
>> office 404 815 6004 | cell 678-427-7809 | fax 770 234 6341
>> 
 
>>  | My Profile | vCard
>> [IMAGE]    [IMAGE]
>> From: Mike O'Neill 
>> [mailto:
 ]
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 11:21 AM
>> To: 'James Hazard'
>> Cc: Neiditz, Jon; 'WG UMA'; 'ProjectVRM list'
>> Subject: RE: [projectvrm] Re: [WG-UMA] The Death of Safe Harbor is the 
>> Ultimate VRM and UMA Legal Opportunity
>>  
>> Correct. Consent must be “freely given, specific and informed”. Even if 
>> the basis is “legitimate interest” they still have the right to opt-out, 
>> by automated means (if that is still in
>> the GDPR).
>>  
>> From: James Hazard 
>> [mailto:
 ]
>> Sent: 06 October 2015 15:48
>> To: Mike O'Neill 
>> <
 >
>> Cc: Neiditz, Jon 
>> <
 >;
>>  WG UMA 
>> <
 >;
>>  ProjectVRM list 
>> <
 >
>> Subject: Re: [projectvrm] Re: [WG-UMA] The Death of Safe Harbor is the 
>> Ultimate VRM and UMA Legal Opportunity
>>  
>> So, roughly, 
>>  
>> ?/
>>  
>> "I consent to You taking the Specified Personal Information to the US.  
>> You agree to: protect it, use it only for Specified Purposes, inform me of 
>> Leaks, and Destroy it when no longer
>> needed for the Specified Purposes or I ask You to."
>>  
>>  
>> Can a person give non-revocable consent to use of data within EU?
>>  
>> /?
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>    
>>  
>> On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Mike O'Neill 
>> <
 >
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>      Consent must be “freely given”, so IMO it follows that it must be 
>> revocable (with a “sunset”). Article 29 and many DPAs also have said that.
>> 
>>       
>> 
>>       
>> 
>>      From: James Hazard 
>> [mailto:
 ]
>>      Sent: 06 October 2015 14:53
>>      To: Neiditz, Jon 
>> <
 >
>>      Cc: WG UMA 
>> <
 >;
>>  ProjectVRM list 
>> <
 >
>>      Subject: [projectvrm] Re: [WG-UMA] The Death of Safe Harbor is the 
>> Ultimate VRM and UMA Legal Opportunity
>> 
>>       
>> 
>>      Do you mean that consent of the person permits transfer of data, but 
>> consent is necessarily revocable and data must be destroyed?
>> 
>>      On Oct 6, 2015 3:40 PM, "Neiditz, Jon" 
>> <
 >
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>            Why?
>> 
>>            The Advocate General's opinion and the Court's decision both 
>> turn on the inability of Safe Harbor to prevent surveillance.  NO 
>> permitted basis for data transfer
>>            prevents surveillance, not Model Clauses, not Binding Corporate 
>> Rules (BCRs).  Logically, if probably not in immediate corporate and EU 
>> national practice, the
>>            only bulletproof basis for data transfer to the US is now the 
>> ever-so-revocable CONSENT, which presumes no fictitious protection from 
>> surveillance.
>> 
>>            See also:  
>> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/good-morning-safe-harbor-dead-what-does-mean-now-later-jon-neiditz?trk=prof-post
>> 
>>            Your thoughts?
>> 
>>            Jon Neiditz
>>            Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
>>            Suite 2800 | 1100 Peachtree Street NE | Atlanta, GA 30309-4528
>>            office 404 815 6004  | cell 678-427-7809 | fax 770 234 6341
>>            
>> 
 
>>  | www.kilpatricktownsend.com
>> 
>>            ________________________________
>> 
>>            Confidentiality Notice:
>>            This communication constitutes an electronic communication 
>> within the meaning of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 
>> Section 2510, and its
>>            disclosure is strictly limited to the recipient intended by the 
>> sender of this message. This transmission, and any attachments, may 
>> contain confidential
>>            attorney-client privileged information and attorney work 
>> product. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, 
>> distribution or use of any of
>>            the information contained in or attached to this transmission 
>> is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Please contact us immediately by return e-mail or 
>> at 404 815 6500, and
>>            destroy the original transmission and its attachments without 
>> reading or saving in any manner.
>> 
>>            ________________________________
>> 
>>            ***DISCLAIMER*** Per Treasury Department Circular 230: Any U.S. 
>> federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any 
>> attachments) is not intended
>>            or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of 
>> (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, 
>> marketing or
>>            recommending to another party any transaction or matter 
>> addressed herein.
>>            _______________________________________________
>>            WG-UMA mailing list
>>            
>> 
 
>>            http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-uma
>>  
>> --
>> @commonaccord