This learning plan discusses how the EU and the US define privacy for any web ac

Question

This learning plan discusses how the EU and the US define privacy for any web activity. Along with that is how the EU and US define workplace monitoring. These are important issues because business is global. Search engines, like Google, operate in the EU; both as an Internet tool and a physical business. Based on what you learned in by viewing the videos and reading the articles in the learning activities as well as internet research, compare and contrast 1) the privacy laws, 2) workplace monitoring laws between the countries. Discuss if you think the privacy laws and policies in force in Europe would work here. Wouldn’t that make it easier for businesses to operate globally? Why or why not? Support your point of view with research; cite your sources, and NO WIKI anything. Your post must be at least 100 words long with correct spelling and grammar

Please make copy paste available

Explanation / Answer

Ans:

Authorities in some European countries can veto a parent's choice for their baby's name in the name of preserving dignity, for example. Government officials also often cloak themselves in dignity to limit freedom of the press and evade public scrutiny.

Most important, while companies face severe regulations limiting their use of consumers' personal information, governments are largely exempt from such limitations. While the use of credit reports is rare in Europe, wiretapping is not. In the Netherlands, for example, wiretaps are 130 times more common than in the U.S. Many Europeans carry some kind of national ID card, still unthinkable for many in the U.S. In Germany, every citizen and long-term visitor must register his or her address with the police.

The reason that privacy laws in Europe and the U.S. are so different springs from a basic divergence in attitude: Europeans reserve their deepest distrust for corporations, while Americans are far more concerned about their government invading their privacy.

As a result, U.S. federal agencies have been given little power to limit the potentially privacy-invading behaviors of private companies. The Federal Trade Commission, the agency charged with protecting U.S. citizens from such intrusions, rarely acts against U.S. firms. When it does, its remedies are generally limited to small fines and out-of-court settlements.

Each European nation, on the other hand, has its Data Protection Authority to monitor corporate behavior. Consumers can appeal to the authority, which in some countries boasts far-ranging subpoena power. Fines for misbehavior are common.

The European Union (“EU”) has issued a major court ruling on employee monitoring which deserves attention on this side of the pond and provides some guidance for companies with employees in the EU. The EU has generally taken a more protective stance than the U.S. when it comes to protection of individual privacy. For example, in 2014 the Court of Justice of the European Union, in Google Spain SL v. Agencia Espanola de Proteccion de Datos, held that a Spanish citizen had the “right to be forgotten” and specifically a right to de-list information on Google about his past financial troubles. The gap between the EU and the US in privacy law may be narrowing ever so slightly.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse T
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.