Adrian,Thanks - we will include.The jurisdiction point is interesting.Should we follow the laws of the country of which the person is a citizen or the laws of the country where we hold the data or the laws of the country where the company is incorporated? or should we follow all laws unless there is a conflict. In that case should the precedence should be the country of incorporation, then the country of the citizen, then the country where the data resides? The order suggested reduces our risk.Perhaps the legal people can tell us?Kevin
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Adrian Gropper < " target="_blank"> > wrote:
For what purpose is the data collected and will it be used for any other purpose?How can I delete my data and what traces are left after I do?What jurisdiction are you under and are you audited in any way?
Adrian--
On Saturday, September 21, 2013, Kevin Cox wrote:Here is how it might work on our website.At the moment on our website we have our privacy policy etc. and say we are doing our best to protect people's privacy.We will still have the privacy policy but in our promotions we emphasise Freedom from surveillance.We only collect information from you we need to conduct business and you have full access to all the information held by us about you and this is never released to anyone without your express permission or unless we are required by law to release the information.We enlist your help to know when someone comes to the website and says it is you it really is you.We do not allow any third party cookies to be active - that is if you come to our website and you have third party cookies or any form of spyware we can detect we remove them and record what we have done for you to examine.We will not knowingly release any information to any government or government agency without them providing us with legal authority.any others?Kevin
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Katherine Warman Kern < > wrote:
+1
Katherine Warman Kern
On Sep 21, 2013, at 4:24 PM, Guy Higgins < > wrote:
> I think that the thing that bothers people is that their privacy is
> breached because they are under surveillance -- under surveillance in a
> society where you are supposed to be free from surveillance unless the
> government has some probable cause to watch you. That's what bothers me.
>
> Guy
>
> On 9/21/13 14:08 , "Iain Henderson" < > wrote:
>
>> Great idea Kevin, it's a lot easier to play with words and get around
>> accusation of breach of privacy than it is an accusation of surveillance.
>>
>> Iain
>>
>>
>> On 21 Sep 2013, at 20:28, Kevin Cox < > wrote:
>>
>>> From Wikidpedia
>>> Noun
>>> € The state or condition of being free from being observed or
>>> disturbed by other people.
>>> € The state of being free from public attention.
>>>
>>> As soon as someone reads this email my privacy has been broken. I hope
>>> someone will observe me through the email so I am not worried about my
>>> privacy with respect to this email.
>>>
>>> A better word to use may be surveillance.
>>>
>>> Surveillance
>>>
>>> Close observation, esp. of a suspected spy or criminal
>>>
>>> Perhaps
>>>
>>> Freedom from surveillance
>>>
>>> rather than
>>>
>>> Right to Privacy
>>>
>>>
>>> Kevin
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> e-mail:
>> blog: www.iainhenderson.info
>> twitter: @iainh1
>>
>> This email and any attachment contains information which is private and
>> confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you are not an
>> addressee, you are not authorised to read, copy or use the e-mail or any
>> attachment. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
>> sender by return e-mail and then destroy it.
>>
>> <a href=""http://miicard.me/b0F1Jsy5">Identity assured by miiCard : Click
>> to Verify</a>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Adrian Gropper MD
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.