Followed Tv license rules

uk1

Disclosing the names of customer details would breach the DPA without a court order. 

I would have thought that to bring a strong case you’d need more than the fact that a person living at an address was a subscriber but that on specified dates they engaged in specific activity that required a licence. 

Cornucopia

uk1 said:

Disclosing the names of customer details would breach the DPA without a court order. 

I doubt that they would have needed the name.    There is also a law enforcement exemption to the DPA.

uk1

Are you suggesting that Sky must comply with personal / property data requests from TVL?

This isn't an exemption for either "national security" or law enforcement as described by ICO.

• Law enforcement – the processing of personal data by competent authorities for law enforcement purposes is outside the UK GDPR’s scope (e.g. the Police investigating a crime). Instead, this type of processing is subject to the rules in Part 3 of the DPA 2018. See our Guide to Law Enforcement Processing for further information.
• National security – personal data processed for the purposes of safeguarding national security or defence is outside the UK GDPR’s scope. However, it is covered by Part 2, Chapter 3 of the DPA 2018, which contains an exemption for national security and defence.

pphillips

Cornucopia said:

uk1 said:

I’ll ask again.

Do you know as a fact that Sky provided the statement voluntarily?

I imagine that we don't really know, and what does "voluntary" mean in this context, anyway?

TVL would have asked whether there was a contract in place at the address, and Sky would have said yes.   I'm not convinced that personal data would have been compromised in that exchange.

I believe that in this case the evidence provided by Sky was to confirm that a TV programme service had been accessed at that address.

uk1

pphillips said:

Cornucopia said:

uk1 said:

I’ll ask again.

Do you know as a fact that Sky provided the statement voluntarily?

I imagine that we don't really know, and what does "voluntary" mean in this context, anyway?

TVL would have asked whether there was a contract in place at the address, and Sky would have said yes.   I'm not convinced that personal data would have been compromised in that exchange.

I believe that in this case the evidence provided by Sky was to confirm that a TV programme service had been accessed at that address.

Do you know whether it was by way of a court order?

Cornucopia

uk1 said:

Are you suggesting that Sky must comply with personal / property data requests from TVL?

Like I said, what does "voluntary" mean in this context?  No doubt if they had refused, TVL would have issued a subpoena for the information.

Anyway this is all highly academic, and it's late.

pphillips

uk1 said:

pphillips said:

Cornucopia said:

uk1 said:

I’ll ask again.

Do you know as a fact that Sky provided the statement voluntarily?

I imagine that we don't really know, and what does "voluntary" mean in this context, anyway?

TVL would have asked whether there was a contract in place at the address, and Sky would have said yes.   I'm not convinced that personal data would have been compromised in that exchange.

I believe that in this case the evidence provided by Sky was to confirm that a TV programme service had been accessed at that address.

Do you know whether it was by way of a court order?

Probably not, unless they want a witness to give an expert opinion, the court's permission isn't required.

uk1

pphillips said:

uk1 said:

pphillips said:

Cornucopia said:

uk1 said:

I’ll ask again.

Do you know as a fact that Sky provided the statement voluntarily?

I imagine that we don't really know, and what does "voluntary" mean in this context, anyway?

TVL would have asked whether there was a contract in place at the address, and Sky would have said yes.   I'm not convinced that personal data would have been compromised in that exchange.

I believe that in this case the evidence provided by Sky was to confirm that a TV programme service had been accessed at that address.

Do you know whether it was by way of a court order?

Probably not, unless they want a witness to give an expert opinion, the court's permission isn't required.

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/exemptions/

pphillips

uk1 said:

pphillips said:

uk1 said:

pphillips said:

Cornucopia said:

uk1 said:

I’ll ask again.

Do you know as a fact that Sky provided the statement voluntarily?

I imagine that we don't really know, and what does "voluntary" mean in this context, anyway?

TVL would have asked whether there was a contract in place at the address, and Sky would have said yes.   I'm not convinced that personal data would have been compromised in that exchange.

I believe that in this case the evidence provided by Sky was to confirm that a TV programme service had been accessed at that address.

Do you know whether it was by way of a court order?

Probably not, unless they want a witness to give an expert opinion, the court's permission isn't required.

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/exemptions/

Just to clarify, the McNamara case was prosecuted at least 20 years ago and data protection laws have changed a lot since then. So are you saying that nowadays, Sky cannot disclose this information?

uk1

pphillips said:

uk1 said:

pphillips said:

uk1 said:

pphillips said:

Cornucopia said:

uk1 said:

I’ll ask again.

Do you know as a fact that Sky provided the statement voluntarily?

I imagine that we don't really know, and what does "voluntary" mean in this context, anyway?

TVL would have asked whether there was a contract in place at the address, and Sky would have said yes.   I'm not convinced that personal data would have been compromised in that exchange.

I believe that in this case the evidence provided by Sky was to confirm that a TV programme service had been accessed at that address.

Do you know whether it was by way of a court order?

Probably not, unless they want a witness to give an expert opinion, the court's permission isn't required.

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/exemptions/

Just to clarify, the McNamara case was prosecuted at least 20 years ago and data protection laws have changed a lot since then. So are you saying that nowadays, Sky cannot disclose this information?

  Thanks, that explains it.

In a nutshell, yes Sky would be breaking the law if they simply disclosed ANY customer related information without an order, or the permsission of the customer. or being wholly 100% satisfied that an exemption exists.  That wasn't true 20 years ago.  I promise you that today Sky knows this and would be doing everything to avoid an investigation or fine with the terrible reputational damage for a breach.