An Australian Senate Committee has raised concerns about the government’s plans to implement a data retention regime (which would be required should this country endorse the European Convention on Cybercrime). The Environment and Communications and References Committee’s report, The adequacy of protections for the privacy of …
"It says the Privacy Act should be amended so that data collected from Australians, even from overseas companies, be covered by the same protections that would apply if the data was collected by an Australian company."
good luck trying to get a (for example) UK company to comply with Australian law, do they think they are the USA or something?
@Mike007, worldwide jurisdiction?
"good luck trying to get a (for example) UK company to comply with Australian law"
They might have a bit more luck with this than you think. The loophole they speak of is an Australian company passing data they have collected onto a foreign company, who is then as not nearly as constrained as the Australian company would be. It's a loophole big enough to drive a truck through.
I think it's there because of Australian companies are saying behind closed doors it is simply impossible for them to control what a labourer in India might do. That is bullshit of course, but I imagine it would be a PITA because it would require them to negotiate new contractual arrangements that would probably be more expensive, and it would effect a lot of large business because outsourcing our data processing to foreigners is as common in Australia as it is anywhere in the OECD. That would be those same big businesses who have the money to spend on getting a word or two into the governments ear.
As for the article suggesting it was liberals wanting a cost justification - you've gotta be kidding me. That would be the same liberals who are saying they will pay the polluters to stop polluting, rather than penalise or taxing them for polluting. They are no better economic rationalists that the Republicans in the US - the ones who put the US in its current hole by fighting two wars at the same time, and paying for it by dropping interest rates to 0. It was the green senators who want to wanted to look at the economic arguments, but I doubt they care about the economics either.
Gawd, the older I get, the more I loath politicians.
RE: worldwide jurisdiction?
I'd say it's a pretty big loophole if that's the legal definition of overseas companies. ie foreign registered companies. considering most companies these days are registered in cayman/bermuda/BVI. besides, Aus enforcing judgments in UK and vice versa happens on a monthly basis.
I wouldn't get too excited
They only decided to to do a cost benefit analysis. We know which way that is going to go. It will just provide some manufactured "justification" and traceability for doing it.
Mine is the one with the cost benefit analysis for purchasing a coat in case of rain.
I'll probably break just like the Do Not Call Register did.
I'll bet they'll have enough exemptions in the thing that it won't make a squat of difference.