As one of Australia’s leading law firms, McCabes has embraced innovation to deliver faster and smarter legal services. Combining the resources of a large firm with the personalised service of a boutique...
Legal AI technology adoption is a natural next step for in-house teams managing an unpredictable workload with limited resources, budget and headcount. Choosing the Right AI Tool for Your In-House Team...
Watch the recording on demand Tomorrow’s lawyers will need more than legal knowledge; they’ll need the confidence to thrive in a technology-driven profession. As artificial intelligence reshapes...
As organisations race to develop or procure AI tools, many are realising that innovation comes with a complex web of legal, ethical, and operational challenges. From data privacy and cybersecurity to bias...
By Jo Wade, Senior Director of Product Management, LexisNexis® With contributions from Seeta Bodke, Amanda Hatcher, Nina Packman, Rupert Robey, Jo Wade, and the LexisNexis team. At this year’s...
Location data is so rich and revealing of patterns of movement and behaviour that it can oftentimes at least individuate, if not also lead to the identification of, individuals.
Any corporation that collects an individual’s location data may be wrestling with specific challenges to meeting its obligations defined under the Australian Privacy Act.
In fact, the Federal Court of Australia (FCA) recently held that Google partially misled Australian consumers about the collection of their location data when it made on-screen representations on Android mobile phones and tablets.
In this article, the following issues are explored, and recommendations are made which may be helpful for lawyers who are advising stakeholders regarding,
Source: Privacy Law Bulletin (2020, Vol 17, No 5)
Authored by Anna Johnston BA, LLB (Hons I), Grad Dip Leg Prac, Grad Cert Mgmt, MPP (Hons)Principal, Salinger Privacyanna@salingerprivacy.com.auwww.salingerprivacy.com.au
COMPLETE THE FORM TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE