Following activity yesteryear the UK’s Office of Fair Trading (OFT), the High Court has granted an interim injunction against Christopher Yewdall to halt his interest inward misleading advertising for information protection notification services. The OFT claimed Yewdall was involved amongst misleading advertisements relating to notification amongst the Information Commissioner under the Data Protection Act 1998. Yewdall’s ads used phoney damage such every mo Data Protection Agency, Data Protection Agency Registrations, Data Protection Agency Services, National Registrations, Data Protection Registration together with Data Protection Registration Services. The OFT received thousands of complaints from businesses regarding these adverts, which used supply addresses all over the country. Yewdall had previously given written assurances to the OFT that he would non move involved amongst such advertising. The OFT considers that such adverts are misleading because they laissez passer the impression they are from an official body, that the businesses receiving them are nether a legal obligation to register amongst the sender together with that notification costs £95. They too neglect to properly explicate which persons are exempt from notification nether the Data Protection Act 1998. Most businesses processing personal information are required yesteryear police describe to notify the Information Commissioner, exactly many pocket-size businesses that procedure information for express purposes are exempt from notification. Businesses that create necessitate to create then tin notify the Information Commissioner directly, for a fee of alone £35.
reminds readers of his “no-mark” proposal (see today's before “Win Kampf” blog). This is even then unopen to other event of a province of affairs inward which a world agency, every mo the proud possessor of the DATA PROTECTION no-mark, could halt whatsoever merchandise usage of damage identical or like to it.
British information protection cons here and here
More misleading ads here, here and here
reminds readers of his “no-mark” proposal (see today's before “Win Kampf” blog). This is even then unopen to other event of a province of affairs inward which a world agency, every mo the proud possessor of the DATA PROTECTION no-mark, could halt whatsoever merchandise usage of damage identical or like to it.
British information protection cons here and here
More misleading ads here, here and here
Komentar
Posting Komentar