There have been quite interesting (strategic) responses so far from Google since the ruling, but I have to say I didn't see this one coming. Quite unlike it to open itself up to public involvement it this manner.
Sally On 11 July 2014 12:00, Lancelot PECQUET <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I understand that the European Commission is indeed thinking > <http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/article-29/index_en.htm> > (with their usual "suggestors") about > a European standard regulation that could possibly overrule members state > regulations. > > Will it be the least common multiple or the greatest common denominator of > national regulations ? > Imho, I doubt all UE countries will agree (or have resources) to reinforce > controls and enforce higher > standards... > > Pierre raises an opengov question regarding transparency and civil society > participation at the EU level > and, of course, I definitely agree with him. > > Lancelot > > Le 11/07/2014 12:03, Pierre Chrzanowski a écrit : > > Hi Puneet, I actually think Google is handling the case quite well to > their profit so far. > > The irony to me is that thanks to a not very well though ruling from the > ECJ, Google is now setting up a consultative decision-making process that > could end with a legal framework on its own, coordinated by a private > global entity, that substitutes to national regulators and rules on what is > public information and what is not. Where are the Data Protection and Right > to Info authorities here ? Will they have the capacity to handle and > control all decisions made by Google on a case by case basis ? > > I find the question raised by Google of high importance and I am keen to > think and discuss about it but I would have really really preferred that > question being raised by my National or European Parliament and being > discussed through a democratic process. Instead of that, we are now in a > strange situation where we are offered to go into a consultative process > and provide our knowledge and reflection on a matter of public interest to > an entity we do not have control over but who is asked, obliged, to > regulate that public matter. > > > > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 10:58 AM, stef <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 09:39:14AM +0200, Pierre Chrzanowski wrote: >> > So now, as expected, we have a private entity, kindly seeking public >> advice >> > from an Advisory Council, to regulate on a case by case basis on what is >> > public information and what is not. I would say there is some irony in >> > there. >> >> i think google did everything to maneuver itself into this gatekeeper >> position. >> >> 2004, don't be evil >> 2014, we changed policy >> >> -- >> otr fp: https://www.ctrlc.hu/~stef/otr.txt >> > > > > -- > *Pierre Chrzanowski* > *Expert Open Data* > > Mail : [email protected] > Skype : pierre.chrzanowski | Twitter : @pzwsk > > > _______________________________________________ > mydata-open-data mailing > [email protected]https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/mydata-open-data > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > mydata-open-data mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/mydata-open-data > > -- *Sally DefforOpen Data & Privacy Project Coordinator | skype:deffor.selase | @SDeffor | +44 (0)7774 734206 The **Open Knowledge Foundation* <http://okfn.org/> *Empowering through Open Knowledge**http://www.okfn.org* <http://www.okfn.org/>* | **@okfn* <https://twitter.com/OKFN>* | **OKF on Facebook* <http://www.facebook.com/OKFNetwork>* | **Blog* <http://blog.okfn.org/>* | **Newsletter <http://okfn.org/?s=Newsletter>* *Have you bought your tickets <http://2014.okfestival.org/tickets/> to OKFestival yet? Join us in Berlin in July (15-17)!* *See you at OKFestival <http://2014.okfestival.org/> 15-17 July 2014*
_______________________________________________ okfn-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-discuss
