It has been a ground-breaking period for innovation and advances in the health care mobile app sector. Working on an acquisition attempt in 2003 by Medibuy Inc of the NHS data transfer framework brought my first taste of health sector technology. At that time the Internet, Intranets, Extranets and HTTPS – secure Hypertext Transfer Protocol were setting the new trends in health care technological innovation. Mobile Apps have long since taken over.
The following article is a high level view of the consequences of Brexit from a legal perspective as it relates to Internet related business.
At the outset there is only one thing for certain and that is that the legal position after Brexit does not have to be uncertain. Indeed, it is possible to extrapolate which laws will fall away and what will be left in place as this will largely depend on what type of post-Brexit model is adopted by the UK. With this in mind the background position regarding Brexit so far is as follows.
The EU is governed by (1) The Treaty of the European Union (TEU); and (2) The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) (the “EU Treaties”). The referendum does not mean that the UK has automatically left the EU. Article 50 of the TEU sets out the necessary mechanisms for the UK’s departure. It provides that:
i) A Member State may leave within two years of notifying the European Council (the Council) of its intention to withdraw from the EU. There is a negotiation process for the withdrawal and future working relationship with the EU Art 50(2)(b);
Mobile and Web based applications are improving businesses through smart use of technology systems to maximise product and/or service delivery. Data processing agreements legal advice has to be as smart to add value to businesses. Today possibly all information technology or businesses that use technology require data processing agreements legal advice. Applications must also interface and work with various internet services. This means back-end services. It also means data processing agreements.
Website Terms Conditions Updates
The clause that deals with most Website Terms Conditions Updates that we have reviewed in the UK reads as follows:
According to a recent article on the Mashable website 72% of Americans have privacy concerns over Google Glass. The main objections to Google Glass are not its massive price tag – $1,500 before tax – or the bad press that some of its users have been getting, it’s privacy concerns.
According to a report released by Toluna – a market research organisation – 72% of Americans don’t want to wear Google Glass due to privacy concerns. Potential users are concerned about security breaches revealing personal data and geo-location data. There was also a perception that the glasses would interfere or distract the wearer from concentration leading to potential safety issues including susceptibility to crime.
The right to be forgotten is the development of the previous article in this library on the new data protection regulations (the “Regulations”) refers to the Regulations being in place by 2014 currently that forecast would be optimistic. Viviane Reding (European Commissioner for Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship) the driving force behind the Regulations, has succeeded in getting the Regulations approved by the European Parliament.
Mobile App Terms Conditions This article on mobile app terms conditions is not and is […]
The main issues that arise in the social media business context from a legal perspective are: (i) defamation (ii) censorship, and freedom of expression (iii) copyright infringement (iv) trade mark infringement (v) breach of privacy (vi) Data Protection (vi) harassment and bullying (Cyberstalking).
Data protection and privacy mobile apps is probably one of the highest priorities for mobile app lawyers.
As an entrepreneur the benefits of creating a concept that utilises tracking technology to bring people together, whether for a tryst or to build business or social communities are obvious. But what are the threats to personal privacy brought about by tracking technology, and how do you avoid any legal challenges?
The digital economy act 2010 and the debate about moral concerns and the copyright wars continue to be hotly argued. One side says the recent expansion of rights and remedies to copyright holders is grotesque and disproportionate and worst of all, it will stifle innovation. The other side, who are trying to assert their rights, are saying that efficient copyright laws are needed to deal with a shift in the ever evolving paradigm of accessing and distributing copyright material. I prefer the latter view. Efficient regulation and legislation is clearly in the public good.