Comment on ‘FuckLAPD.com’ Lets Anyone Use Facial Recognition to Instantly Identify Cops
dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 21 hours agoDude it literally states that they shall provides exceptions to former chapters as shown here
This is the exact text. I don’t know why you insist on pushing back. If you want to consult a solicitor to confirm then have at it, but it can’t be more clear than it is allowed under artistic or expression and that member states must provide exceptions to the chapters listed which includes the one you cited. Man alive!!!
1. Member States shall by law reconcile the right to the protection of personal data pursuant to this Regulation with the right to freedom of expression and information, including processing for journalistic purposes and the purposes of academic, artistic or literary expression.
2. For processing carried out for journalistic purposes or the purpose of academic artistic or literary expression, Member States shall provide for exemptions or derogations from Chapter II (principles), Chapter III (rights of the data subject), Chapter IV (controller and processor), Chapter V (transfer of personal data to third countries or international organisations), Chapter VI (independent supervisory authorities), Chapter VII (cooperation and consistency) and Chapter IX (specific data processing situations) if they are necessary to reconcile the right to the protection of personal data with the freedom of expression and information.
3. Each Member State shall notify to the Commission the provisions of its law which it has adopted pursuant to paragraph 2 and, without delay, any subsequent amendment law or amendment affecting them.
General_Effort@lemmy.world 20 hours ago
Yes. That is what the member states are instructed to do. What is unclear?
dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 20 hours ago
You can also see here on this article, but it would much easier if you would provide a law that prohibits this.
Source
Source2
General_Effort@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
Again?
I can’t see that either of these was written by someone qualified or that they have a good reputation. You should take more care to find credible sources.
I suggest that you check the data protection office of your local government. There may be subtle differences between countries. For the UK, that would be the ICO. But beware, that the UK is no longer part of the EU and its interpretation of the GDPR may be looser.
If you’re into photography, copyright and other laws also need to be considered. There’s a lot of diversity between EU countries in these things.
dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 18 hours ago
You have to be trolling as I’ve provided text from the House of Commons, the House of Lords, Article 85 of GDPR and a couple of extra sources.
If you’re from the UK I suggest you contact your local MP with a view to stop spreading misinformation, if you’re not from the Uk then in the nicest way possible fuck off and stop talking about stuff you have no clue you silly cunt.
dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 20 hours ago
You still thinking that you don’t have the right to photograph people in a public place and post them on photography forums for instance.
Beginning to think you’re trolling or you’re that dense that NASA might mistake you for a black hole.
General_Effort@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
Put like that, that’s exactly correct. That’s not a recognized right in the EU, unlike data protection. That does not mean that it is forbidden, provided that the GDPR is followed.
I have very patiently and kindly answered your questions and corrected your misunderstandings. I am not sure what you expect of me. Should I google explanatory links for you and paste the content here? I feel it would be rude to treat you like you are a child.