Media Law in the News #2

https://apnews.com/amp/04326e9b1da647739fe35550e6edcc56?__twitter_impression=true
Part I - Summary of Issue

In 2016, the EU enacted a law called the General Data Protection Regulation which replaced the Data Protection Directive 95/46/ec. This new law was to be enacted in the Spring of 2018 as the primary law regulating the way media and other companies protect citizens' personal data. On May 25, 2018 media companies like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc., must: 1) require the consent of subjects for data processing, 2) anonymizing collected data to protect privacy, 3) providing data breach notifications, 4) safely handling the transfer of data across borders, and 5) requiring certain companies to appoint a data protection officer to oversee the General Data Protection Regulation as it pertains to the individual company and its compliance.

This law has made worldwide news, because in the wake of the Cambridge Analytica breach of an immeasurable number of American's Facebook accounts, this law sets an important baseline for how citizens should be treated, and safeguarded from the processing and utilization of their personal data. In this case, the EU defines personal data as "information relating to an identified, or an identifiable person." As we are learning this controversy with Facebook was not a stand alone event. Many people worldwide have lost their personal data, confidentiality, etc., as a result of these data breaches and failure to value citizen's protection. The GDPR law is a necessary step to giving citizens back the control over their lives and information. The news surrounding this law has provided the US and other countries an example of the laws and regulations that should be enacted in their own prospective countries.

To regulate and maintain the core of this law, media, companies, and organizations that fail to adhere to these regulations will be fined "as much as 20 million euros or 4 percent of their annual global turnover (whichever is greater)." Secondly, consent must always be required. Third, the GDPR must show that each company has a assigned person who is monitoring "on a large scale." And, fourth, the GDPR assures and encourages companies that they create the proper mechanism to always maintain compliance with the law.

Part II - Legal Questions Raised
1. Who own's your 'personal data,' the company collecting or you as an individual?

2. What is the best way to protect an individual's privacy while not impeding future innovation?

3. What is the difference between privacy and confidentiality?

4. What is personal identifiable information?

Part III - Relevant Doctrine/Precedent
The category of law which must be discussed here is privacy. There are three distinct rights of privacy: access to personal information, personal autonomy, and the right of publicity. The right to privacy is alluded to in the US Constitution under the Fourth Amendment, which says, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause..." however, the word privacy is not specifically used.

The Supreme Court first recognized a case for privacy during the Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), in which the right of marital privacy against state restrictions on a couple's ability to be counseled in the use of contraceptives, was questioned. The Court decided that even though the Constitution does not explicitly protect a general right to privacy, there is area to create rights to privacy.

The precedent that must be used is the Constitutional Right to Privacy. This protections comes from the Third, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments. The Constitution protects from governmental invasion of privacy. Harlan's "reasonable expectation of privacy" test from Katz establishes a Fourth Amendment right to privacy when: 1) a person exhibits an actual expectation of privacy, and 2) society is prepared to recognize this expectation as reasonable.

Privacy is the law that is the relevant doctrine that applies tot his case because now that the EU has enacted the GDPR, and that one of the basis' for the law states that their consumers and customers data cannot be given to other agencies, as well as those out of the country. Spotify and Facebook are already sending emails out about their new privacy guidelines. And, it will be necessary to follow along to see how other large companies attempt to follow in the steps of these privacy guidelines too, and how the Supreme Court will be handling cases, and how the precedent of law could change.

Part IV - Conclusion
As independent American's, we are constantly concerned with our privacy. Especially with Facebook's breach of privacy in the forefront of our minds, it is important to understand how the U.S Constitution protects us. Daily, people are accessing the internet and marketers, advertisers, and businesses have direct access to our information and data.

Meanwhile, the market for high functioning camera is growing and people, as well as public figures like celebrities are more vulnerable for experiencing breaches of their privacy. As a result, there have been substantial calls for the government to pass legislation that protects individuals and their information with the highest regard.This is a tricky process though because privacy must be maintained while simultaneously adhering to the First Amendment rights of the constitution. However, ultimately, a right to privacy is intrinsic to American's and all people's ability to live. A right to privacy keeps everyone in check and helps maintain the personal bubble everyone deserves.

Notification of misuse of data, enhancing privacy settings, and building stronger policies are all essential to working to fix this problem.