I'd really like to know how it is the public, or anyone for that matter, can measure the risk to individual privacy and evaluate the business cost impact of retention when they haven't (and may not?) first defined the data sets to be retained.

Maybe, in the end, the public comment period is merely a nice gesture with little anticipated weight on ultimate decision-making, as the article implies?

Will watch how this plays out with interest.  It has close parallels to questions being considered here in the US as well.

Sent from my iPhone

On May 7, 2012, at 1:01 PM, PeterK <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Roxon goes public on data retention - Communications - News - ZDNet
> Australia
> The government is seeking public opinion on whether the *Telecommunications
> (Interception and Access) Act 1979* should be amended to require
> telecommunications companies to have data-retention periods of up to two
> years for certain, as yet undefined, data sets. The committee is to take
> into account what impact this would have on customer privacy, and the costs
> it would impose on telcos.
> 
> http://bit.ly/IHRVst
> 
> Source:
> http://www.zdnet.com.au/roxon-goes-public-on-data-retention-339337213.htm
> See if people are clicking on this link: http://bit.ly/IHRVst+
> Try the bitly.com sidebar to see who is talking about a page on the web:
> http://bitly.com/pages/sidebar
> 
> List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
> Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
> To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
> mailto:[log in to unmask]

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]