white_paper_on_data_protection_in_india_171127_final_v2

7.2 Specific Exemptions and International Practices
(i)
Personal or household purpose
In instances where the data controller is an individual who processes data for herself, or for
household activities, such activity would be outside the scope of regulation. For instance, a
personal diary maintained by an individual which may have references to friends and family,
or an address book on a computer containing personal data of friends and acquaintances.
However, if personal data collected for domestic processing use is published on the Internet
and is available to a large audience, it may fall outside the remit of this exemption. 272
Similarly, some instances of domestic processing such as installation of CCTV cameras in
residences, use of drones and wearable technology, use of blogs and social networks,
recording of personal conversations etc. will have to be examined closely for the purposes of
this exemption.
Collection and usage of personal data for personal uses or household purposes is outside the
scope of data protection laws in several jurisdictions such as UK 273 EU, 274 and South
Africa. 275 It will be difficult to identify processing for personal or household purposes as
individuals have more ‗publishing power‘ which was earlier available to commercial
organisations. 276 The EU has formulated certain criteria to determine whether the processing
falls under personal or household purposes. 277 These may be examined further for the purpose
of articulating the exemption in law.
(ii)
Journalistic/Artistic/Literary purposes
This exemption seeks to strike a balance between an individual‘s right to privacy and the right
to free speech and expression. For instance, news<strong>paper</strong>s routinely publish personal data of
public figures or other individuals while reporting. However, the terms ‗journalistic purposes‘
and ‗journalist‘ are not defined in law currently. These terms need to be defined to ensure
clarity in the scope of application. In some instances, non-media organisations which publish
272 Bodil Lindqvist v. Åklagarkammaren i Jönköping, Case C-101/01 (2003), European Court of Justice– a
representative of the local church used her personal computer to set up websites which was linked to a Swedish
church website. It ended up displaying the names, addresses, hobbies, information about jobs of the defendant
and her colleagues. The colleagues‘ consent had not been sought. Held to be outside the scope of the domestic
processing exemption.
273 Section 36, UK DPA.
274 Article 2, EU GDPR.
275 Section 6, POPI Act.
276 Annex 2 – ‗Proposals for Amendments regarding exemption for personal or household activities (EU)‘,
European Commission, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/article-29/documentation/otherdocument/files/2013/20130227_statement_dp_annex2_en.pdf,
(last accessed 31 October 2017).
277 Annex 2 – ‗Proposals for Amendments regarding exemption for personal or household activities (EU)‘,
European Commission, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/article-29/documentation/otherdocument/files/2013/20130227_statement_dp_annex2_en.pdf,
(last accessed 31 October 2017).
53