IP addresses and personal information (was Re: [LINK] Fwd: On Line Opinion - 16 February 2007)

Alan L Tyree alan at austlii.edu.au
Sat Feb 24 11:04:16 AEDT 2007


On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 10:15:25 +1100
Adam Todd <link at todd.inoz.com> wrote:

> At 09:24 AM 24/02/2007, Howard Lowndes wrote:
> >Alan L Tyree wrote:
> >>On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 18:37:48 +1100
> >>Adam Todd <link at todd.inoz.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>I can tell you how and why it complies.
> >>>
> >>>Firstly the Privacy Act doesn't provide for Joe Citizen to take an
> >>>action in the courts against a person or company that collects,
> >>>holds, or releases personal or private information.
> 
> I didn't get Alans posting <shrug>
> 
> >>Technically true, but JC can make a complaint about an invasion of
> >>privacy: s32 of the Privacy Act. The complaint is made to the
> >>Privacy Commissioner or to the adjudicator under an approved Code.
> 
> Yes. However the Commissioner has a mandate not to take to cases of 
> individuals, only classes of people affected by the same action.
> 
> I have a letter from the Commissioner and the AFP that clearly state
> this.

Again, yes and no. The Commissioner cannot hear a complaint from an
individual IF the individual is a class member for a representative
complaint. The relevant section is s39.

If there is no representative complaint, of if the individual is not a
class member, then the Commissioner can hear a complaint from the
individual IF the individual is complaining about an interference with
the privacy of the individual making the complaint. 

An "interference with privacy" by an organisation is a breach of a
binding Privacy Code or the National Privacy Principles if no Code
applies. "Organisation" in this case includes companies and
partnerships.

Interference by "agencies", like the one that Howard was mentioning, is
more involved, but is set out in detail in s13.


> 
> >>The Commissioner can award damages including damages for hurt
> >>feelings or humiliation suffered by the complainant: s52.
> 
> Except, that, the Commissioner has to be willing to take it into the 
> courts.  And as there is no basis in law in Australia for a tort of 
> invasion to privacy, it's not going to be successful.
> 
> Although there are some people trying to get a Tort of Privacy up.  I
> will be entertaining this as an aspect of proceedings currently
> before the Supreme Court.  It's only a point to draw debate and meet
> the requirements of the three high court judges from a couple of
> years ago.
> 
> If I get some help specifically on that area of the proceeding, it
> may well be that a Tort for Privacy can be established in Australia.
> But I doubt there will be anyone in the court room who gives a damn
> or anyone rushing to help me make it a point and win it hands down.
> 
> Would be nice if I didn't have to focus on that point.
> 
> >>In some ways, this is better than being able to bring a court
> >>action: it is cheaper, quicker and generally friendlier to the
> >>complainant.
> 
> The Commissioner has to still take it before a Judge.  In any event
> it's appealable and such an appeal will, currently, be successful in
> the courts.
> 
> I think it would have to be a very extreme and unusual circumstance
> that would give rise to such a situation actually taking place.
> 
> It didn't even happen when Telstra published private names and
> numbers, including details of people who weren't Telstra customers,
> and had to hire security guards for my family for 4 months.
> 
> >This is true, but I found it to not be very successful.  I
> >complained to the OFPC about the manner in which CASA publish the
> >details of aircraft registrants.  The Aviation Act requires them to
> >publish the detail and allows them to do so "in such manner as they
> >see fit".  I complained that the manner that they chose (zip file on
> >their web site
> >http://www.casa.gov.au/casadata/register/datafiles.asp ) was too
> >broad and contrary to the spirit of the Privacy Act and that under
> >the Aviation Act they could have chosen a less intrusive method of
> >dissemination.  My complaint was rejected.
> 
> Because Hoawrd, you were the only one to complain :)  Get EVERY
> aviator to complain and the situation might change.  ALthough,
> technically the PC isn't the place to go.  You need to take this
> issue, as a class issue, before the ADT as it's Law that gives them
> the power "as they see fit" and that's Administrative.
> 
> The PC doesn't have power to conflict with other laws.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Link mailing list
> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
> 


-- 
Alan L Tyree                    http://www2.austlii.edu.au/~alan
Tel: +61 2 4782 2670            Mobile: +61 427 486 206
Fax: +61 2 4782 7092            FWD: 615662



More information about the Link mailing list