undefined | Better HN

0 pointsjosho10y ago0 comments

To offer an alternative viewpoint.

In Canada we have laws that protect personal health data. For instance my doctor cannot save my patient data outside of the country. This is a major pain for SAAS vendors, and I understand google's position. However, as a patient I appreciate knowing that my personal health data is not being sent around the world to other jurisdictions that may not have the same privacy and data protection laws that we do here.

So, I have to wonder do we have a problem of countries requiring local storage for reasons that are questionable? Or is this simply a preemptive strike ensuring companies like google continue their easy access to global markets? Given my example above I suggest its the latter.

0 comments

7 comments · 2 top-level

_delirium10y ago· 4 in thread

I agree with this as an American as well. Obviously worries about the NSA getting your data are moot if the data was American to begin with, but there are a lot of other concerns, too. I wouldn't feel comfortable with my medical data being stored just anywhere, and I think it's entirely reasonable that the U.S. government should be able to put some restrictions on where it's stored.

It may be possible to come up with a list of reasonably similar and friendly countries where such restrictions are dropped, because they agree to similar protections, and form a kind of common data-storage zone. For example, I am probably okay with reputable Canadian or German companies being contracted to store sensitive data. We could have a treaty formalizing what that zone is and what common protections will be applied. But the TPP is not by any reasonable stretch of the imagination that zone. The TPP includes countries where being homosexual is a serious crime, for example. Is it really wise for the U.S. government to agree to be bound by treaty not to take measures to keep its citizens' medical data, student records, employment records, etc. out of those countries' hands?

pzone10y ago

That's the price of freedom: putting individuals in control of their data means they have responsibility to protect it. But is that such a bad trade-off?

Let me put it another way. Someone has to decide where it's safe to send and store private data. Right now, in many cases, it's the government. Why do we think that the government is properly equipped to make that decision for us? Make sure you don't give your medical records to any shady companies. Corporations with international operations and teams of lawyers are probably better equipped to determine where data can be safely secured than some random regulator.

_delirium10y ago

How do you propose that I personally reach agreements with corporations on storage of my medical records? I've visited a hospital once in my life, which involved doing business with dozens of different "businesses", from the hospital to the anesthesiologist, all of whom collected records, and none of whom I was in a condition to negotiate with on an individual basis (nor would they have been interested in negotiating with me regarding their data-protection policies anyway). And I don't have any faith in corporations determining where data can be safely stored; I think they will primarily go with where it can be most profitably stored, which is not necessarily the same question. I would feel much more comfortable if the hospital, anesthesiologist, and everyone else were required to store my data in accordance with a regulator's oversight. And preferably in the USA or a friendly western country. The companies can of course exercise additional caution if they feel it warranted, but I'd like the government to legislate some minimums.

vidarh10y ago

The EU did this, remember, by agreeing to a "safe harbor" agreement with the US, where companies could certify that they would voluntarily treat personal data from the EU according to EU data protection rules. But then it transpires that we can not actually trust this, because US companies do not have the ability to control this.

That said, as as long as TPP only requires that there is no discrimination, that should not affect the EU rules much other than perhaps requiring the EU to put more resources into determine which countries have laws and governments that makes it possible for local companies in those countries to abide by the EU regulations.

joshoOP10y ago

Quoting the eff:

stronger privacy laws are outlawed if they amount to an “arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade.”

it would seem that google's opinion is that protecting my health data is a restriction on trade. That's why I'm concerned with the TPP.

jonknee10y ago· 1 in thread

> However, as a patient I appreciate knowing that my personal health data is not being sent around the world to other jurisdictions that may not have the same privacy and data protection laws that we do here.

Having your bits stored on Canadian soil doesn't magically make them secure. The emphasis should be on security, not physical location.

msbarnett10y ago

False dichotomy. I would like my data stored securely AND not governed by the laws of some foreign regime in which I have no say in the future.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse