white_paper_on_data_protection_in_india_171127_final_v2
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
6. Are there any other views relat<strong>in</strong>g to the above c<strong>on</strong>cepts?<br />
3. Def<strong>in</strong>iti<strong>on</strong> of Pers<strong>on</strong>al Data<br />
The def<strong>in</strong>iti<strong>on</strong> of pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong> or pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>data</strong> is the critical element which<br />
determ<strong>in</strong>es the z<strong>on</strong>e of <strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong>al privacy guaranteed by a <strong>data</strong> protecti<strong>on</strong> legislati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Thus, it is important to accurately def<strong>in</strong>e pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong> or pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>data</strong> which will<br />
trigger the applicati<strong>on</strong> of the <strong>data</strong> protecti<strong>on</strong> law.<br />
For a fuller discussi<strong>on</strong>, see page 34 above.<br />
Questi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
1. What are your views <strong>on</strong> the c<strong>on</strong>tours of the def<strong>in</strong>iti<strong>on</strong> of pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>data</strong> or <strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong>?<br />
2. For the purpose of a <strong>data</strong> protecti<strong>on</strong> law, should the term ‗pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>data</strong>‘ or ‗pers<strong>on</strong>al<br />
<strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong>‘ be used?<br />
Alternatives:<br />
a. The SPDI Rules use the term sensitive pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong> or <strong>data</strong>.<br />
b. Adopt <strong>on</strong>e term, pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>data</strong> as <strong>in</strong> the EU GDPR or pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong> as <strong>in</strong><br />
Australia, Canada or South Africa.<br />
3. What k<strong>in</strong>d of <strong>data</strong> or <strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong> qualifies as pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>data</strong>? Should it <strong>in</strong>clude any k<strong>in</strong>d<br />
of <strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong> <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g facts, op<strong>in</strong>i<strong>on</strong>s or assessments irrespective of their accuracy?<br />
4. Should the def<strong>in</strong>iti<strong>on</strong> of pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>data</strong> focus <strong>on</strong> identifiability of an <strong>in</strong>dividual? If yes,<br />
should it be limited to an ‗identified‘, ‗identifiable‘ or ‗reas<strong>on</strong>ably identifiable‘<br />
<strong>in</strong>dividual?<br />
5. Should an<strong>on</strong>ymised or pseud<strong>on</strong>ymised <strong>data</strong> be outside the purview of pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>data</strong>?<br />
Should the law recommend either an<strong>on</strong>ymisati<strong>on</strong> or psued<strong>on</strong>ymisati<strong>on</strong>, for <strong>in</strong>stance as<br />
the EU GDPR does?<br />
[An<strong>on</strong>ymisati<strong>on</strong> seeks to remove the identity of the <strong>in</strong>dividual from the <strong>data</strong>, while<br />
pseud<strong>on</strong>ymisati<strong>on</strong> seeks to disguise the identity of the <strong>in</strong>dividual from <strong>data</strong>.<br />
An<strong>on</strong>ymised <strong>data</strong> falls outside the scope of pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>data</strong> <strong>in</strong> most <strong>data</strong> protecti<strong>on</strong> laws<br />
while psued<strong>on</strong>ymised <strong>data</strong> c<strong>on</strong>t<strong>in</strong>ues to be pers<strong>on</strong>al <strong>data</strong>. The EU GDPR actively<br />
recommends psued<strong>on</strong>ymisati<strong>on</strong> of <strong>data</strong>.]<br />
6. Should there be a differentiated level of protecti<strong>on</strong> for <strong>data</strong> where an <strong>in</strong>dividual is<br />
identified when compared to <strong>data</strong> where an <strong>in</strong>dividual may be identifiable or reas<strong>on</strong>ably<br />
207