bickster Posted February 20, 2021 Moderator Share Posted February 20, 2021 2 minutes ago, Rds1983 said: I could see a decent lawyer arguing that photos without people in could amount to PII, they could contain other ways of identifying someone other than just an actual picture of the person (such as location information) What constitutes PII is clearly defined in law. If the photo contained geotag information, FB would only have to remove the geotag information itself and not the photo. You could go as far as having your account deleted under right to be forgotten and they still wouldn't have to remove the photo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rds1983 Posted February 20, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted February 20, 2021 3 minutes ago, bickster said: What constitutes PII is clearly defined in law. If the photo contained geotag information, FB would only have to remove the geotag information itself and not the photo. You could go as far as having your account deleted under right to be forgotten and they still wouldn't have to remove the photo Defined as " any information which are related to an identified or identifiable natural person", which is purposefully vague enough to capture anything it needs to and could be contained in any of the images. The law on it is still very new as @limpidsays which is why I was hoping to see clear ICO guidance or case law. This still doesn't sound right to me (very little to do with Facebook does). I could be way off as l I don't work with photo's and the Internet is a rare point for gdpr workwise so if you can point me in the right direction for the official guidance I'd happily read, in a few days possibly when my covid brain working better (I just loaded clean plates straight into the dishwasher and it took me 20 odd minutes to realise). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 20, 2021 Moderator Share Posted February 20, 2021 1 minute ago, Rds1983 said: Defined as " any information which are related to an identified or identifiable natural person", which is purposefully vague enough to capture anything it needs to and could be contained in any of the images. The law on it is still very new as @limpidsays which is why I was hoping to see clear ICO guidance or case law. This still doesn't sound right to me (very little to do with Facebook does). I could be way off as l I don't work with photo's and the Internet is a rare point for gdpr workwise so if you can point me in the right direction for the official guidance I'd happily read, in a few days possibly when my covid brain working better (I just loaded clean plates straight into the dishwasher and it took me 20 odd minutes to realise). There is none because GDPR doesn't apply unless the image is of someone. It really is that simple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rds1983 Posted February 20, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted February 20, 2021 7 minutes ago, bickster said: There is none because GDPR doesn't apply unless the image is of someone. It really is that simple Are photos information, yes. Could they identify someone without the person being in them? Possibly if they are related to a person. There's nobody in this photo but I reckon you could identify someone who lives there and as such gdpr applies. Might fail the natural person but mind... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 20, 2021 Moderator Share Posted February 20, 2021 6 minutes ago, Rds1983 said: There's nobody in this photo but I reckon you could identify someone who lives there and as such gdpr applies. nope, there is nothing in that photo that is personal information, for starters there is nothing that can date the image, secondly it is a public building and you'd know who lived there with or without the image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted February 20, 2021 Administrator Share Posted February 20, 2021 1 minute ago, Rds1983 said: Are photos information, yes. Could they identify someone without the person being in them? Possibly if they are related to a person. There's nobody in this photo but I reckon you could identify someone who lives there and as such gdpr applies. Might fail the natural person but mind... You are clearly identifying Stanley Baldwin. Or Churchill. Or Cherie Blair. Or Larry the cat. Which of them would be claiming that this photo identified them? Now imagine if a photo contains one of a pair of identical twins. How do you verify which twin has consented and which is has the right to request deletion. We can only follow the guidance from the ICO, because that would constitute a mitigating defence. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rds1983 Posted February 20, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted February 20, 2021 12 minutes ago, bickster said: nope, there is nothing in that photo that is personal information, for starters there is nothing that can date the image, secondly it is a public building and you'd know who lived there with or without the image. Doesn't matter if you already know who lives there, publicly available information is still bound by gdpr if it can be used to identify a living individual. My house is listed on Rightmove, people could potentially identify me based off photos of the outside. We're going in circles, derailing the thread (I doubt many people wonder about gdpr), and we obviously disagree. Let's just leave it at that. Have a good evening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted February 20, 2021 Moderator Share Posted February 20, 2021 2 hours ago, limpid said: I pay for Youtube and get no ads on music or videos. I don't know whether they have a free music storage service. If you have Amazon Prime, then they have one bundled (or at least they did last time I looked). How do you backup your physical media? It sounds like it's important to you and @chrisp65 so what would you do if was damaged or stolen? Nothing is free. I back up the physical media to: Computer & back_up hard drive (out of an old computer), plus iPod & phone. In the event of a fire, maybe I'd be a bit stuffed for a lot of it. But insurance and buy again. Some of it is in the clouds - the stuff I bought from apple and amazon (you get a download with Amazon CDs). The LPs I own I also have digital copies the music (on yet another back up). 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Follyfoot Posted February 20, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted February 20, 2021 Was her real name Rama Lama Ding Dong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted February 20, 2021 Share Posted February 20, 2021 3 hours ago, limpid said: How do you backup your physical media? It sounds like it's important to you and @chrisp65 so what would you do if was damaged or stolen? Nothing is free. 1 hour ago, blandy said: I back up the physical media to: Computer & back_up hard drive (out of an old computer), plus iPod & phone. In the event of a fire, maybe I'd be a bit stuffed for a lot of it. But insurance and buy again. Some of it is in the clouds - the stuff I bought from apple and amazon (you get a download with Amazon CDs). The LPs I own I also have digital copies the music (on yet another back up). The photos of albums that I stick on here usually have the same background, my kitchen worktop. That photo lends a level of insurance, and I’ve had it mentioned on the contents insurance that I have records, and a record of the records. As long as no one record is worth £100 or more, they are happy with that. Of course, that only truly gets tested in bad circumstances and I wouldn’t trust an insurance company as far as I could throw them. Lots of modern vinyl will come with a download code, that then gets stuck on a memory stick so I can play it in the car. For older stuff with no download, I’ve got a £40 turntable that connects to the laptop and converts to mp3 whilst playing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 22, 2021 Share Posted February 22, 2021 Why don’t the poor African countries export solar generated electricity to make a few quid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted February 22, 2021 Share Posted February 22, 2021 5 minutes ago, Genie said: Why don’t the poor African countries export solar generated electricity to make a few quid? I’m guessing the clue is in the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mandy Lifeboats Posted February 22, 2021 Share Posted February 22, 2021 (edited) 25 minutes ago, Genie said: Why don’t the poor African countries export solar generated electricity to make a few quid? They would be exporting to neighbouring countries who have the same resource. To export further they would need to pay countries in between to transmit that electricity. That is both expensive and complicated. Its a bit like saying why doesn't UK export rain water to Africa? Edited February 22, 2021 by Mandy Lifeboats Spelling mishsteaks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted February 22, 2021 Share Posted February 22, 2021 7 minutes ago, Mandy Lifeboats said: They would be exporting to neighbouring countries who have the same resource. To export further they would need to pay countries in between to transmit that electricity. That is both expensive and complicated. Its a bit like saying why doesn't UK export rain water to Africa? You can transmit electricity without involving your neighbours. If the planet was surrounded by a rain water field then we could export rain water without pipes . It 'isn't though which is why the two examples are not comparable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted February 22, 2021 Author VT Supporter Share Posted February 22, 2021 44 minutes ago, Genie said: Why don’t the poor African countries export solar generated electricity to make a few quid? I don't know, why don't the poor African countries export solar generated electricity to make a few quid? Oh, sorry, thought I was in the joke thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted February 22, 2021 Share Posted February 22, 2021 Even the rich African countries don't do it. Looking at you Wakanda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 22, 2021 Share Posted February 22, 2021 Is it just down to cost? Given the abundance of sunshine, space and the need for electricity I thought there would be a business case for it. Maybe not. I was just looking at some studies, to power the entire planet you’d need land equivalent to 3% of the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted February 22, 2021 Share Posted February 22, 2021 2 minutes ago, Genie said: Is it just down to cost? Given the abundance of sunshine, space and the need for electricity I thought there would be a business case for it. Maybe not. I was just looking at some studies, to power the entire planet you’d need land equivalent to 3% of the US. Isn’t it a bit like asking why poor people don’t invest their money in a successful business so they can have a regular income and not be poor anymore? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 22, 2021 Share Posted February 22, 2021 Just now, chrisp65 said: Isn’t it a bit like asking why poor people don’t invest their money in a successful business so they can have a regular income and not be poor anymore? Not really. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted February 22, 2021 Share Posted February 22, 2021 (edited) Just now, Genie said: Is it just down to cost? Lack of profit most likely. There's a lot of money involved in destroying the planet . Edited February 22, 2021 by Brumerican 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts