Birthday parties, valid consent and how not to break POPIA law

rvZA

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
5,159

The Information Regulator of South Africa has recently reminded the public that photographs clearly identifying an individual are regarded as personal information.

This is in terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act which became enforceable in early July this year.

The changes to the law mean that the distribution of images of people is regarded as processing of personal information in terms of the act.

The act prohibits the distribution of personal information, including images of people, without their consent. What does this mean, though, practically?

Candice le Sueur Fisher, a Cape Town-based privacy and ethics consultant, describes for Parent24 how this has implications for families and school employees who may be tempted to share photos of each other, and of children.
 

rvZA

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
5,159
Yes, this does not only apply to normal birthday parties. This affects any person taking a photograph anywhere, in public or not. No person can publish such photograph anywhere without first obtaining permission from every person in that photograph.
 

daveza

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
44,256
Le Sueur Fisher stresses that "A photo of someone belongs to that person, just like any of their other personal information would belong to them.

1627578588128.png
 

Supervan II

Expert Member
Joined
May 8, 2011
Messages
2,324
Yes, this does not only apply to normal birthday parties. This affects any person taking a photograph anywhere, in public or not. No person can publish such photograph anywhere without first obtaining permission from every person in that photograph.
Which sort of defeats the purpose, no?

Soon you'll have to ask a building for permission before taking a photo of it. :rolleyes:
 

ForceFate

Honorary Master
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
31,071
The POPI Act is stupid. It will be changed a lot over the course of the next 10 years by the higher courts.
Hasn't variations of the law been adopted by the entire western world?
 

rvZA

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
5,159
Hasn't variations of the law been adopted by the entire western world?

No. In the UK the regulator themselves made various changes without their matters having to go to court. For instance, they no longer see a name, surname and date of birth as Personal Identifiable information. They made a ruling that there may be more than one person born on the same day with the same names and surname.

In SA, we do not have the intellect and capacity to do this proactively. We need to approach courts and have them think for us.
 

rvZA

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
5,159
And that would be a state law I guess?

Applicable accross the US and also initially took the lead from the GDPR trying to apply it globally, but as always the Dems got a blood nose after the fall.
 

DA-LION-619

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
12,908
Who is going to go to a bday party and suddenly worry about this?
Good thing News24 got the advice from a ‘lawyer’
Applicable accross the US and also initially took the lead from the GDPR trying to apply it globally, but as always the Dems got a blood nose after the fall.
Still a state law. GDPR is also applicable in the US.
 

rvZA

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
5,159
Who is going to go to a bday party and suddenly worry about this?

Wait until a b!tch fight breaks out and one mother reports another to the Information Regulator. Once this information hits social media, people will remind themselves to leave all cameras at home when visiting friends and family or go on holiday. Snowflakes asked for this and now they got it.
 

nightjar

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
5,484
Yes, this does not only apply to normal birthday parties. This affects any person taking a photograph anywhere, in public or not. No person can publish such photograph anywhere without first obtaining permission from every person in that photograph.
Does that mean that publishing footage/stills from a cctv camera recording a housebreaking, assault or other crime would fall foul of this law?
 

Supervan II

Expert Member
Joined
May 8, 2011
Messages
2,324
Has anyone actually bothered to read said act?

If you had read it, it would become immediately apparent how stupid and short-sighted it is in its current form.

Even the current practice (which is legislated under lockdown rules, by the way) of signing a register when visiting your favourite restaurant contravenes said act as anyone could read/copy said info without any trouble.
 

Supervan II

Expert Member
Joined
May 8, 2011
Messages
2,324
Does that mean that publishing footage/stills from a cctv camera recording a housebreaking, assault or other crime would fall foul of this law?
Yes. Also forbidden to publish: "innocent until proven guilty" :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL: and all that, even if caught flagrante delicto.
 
Top