Privacy is important!

The European Commission is very serious regarding privacy rights. In fact, the 30th of September it has sued the UK for not fully implementing EU rules on the confidentiality of electronic communications such as e-mail or internet browsing.
The claims against UK are the following:

• there is no independent national authority to supervise the interception of some communications, although the establishment of such authority is required under the ePrivacy and Data Protection Directives, in particular to hear complaints regarding interception of communications
• current UK law authorises interception of communications not only where the persons concerned have consented to interception but also when the person intercepting the communications has ‘reasonable grounds for believing’ that consent to do so has been given. These UK provisions do not comply with EU rules defining consent as “freely given, specific and informed indication of a person’s wishes”
• current UK law prohibiting and providing sanctions in case of unlawful interception are limited to ‘intentional’ interception only, whereas EU law requires Members States to prohibit and to ensure sanctions against any unlawful interception regardless of whether committed intentionally or not. (Citation from here.)

This is the right attention to give to privacy issues. We are sure that when Yatedo comes to the commission's attention it will be closed.
All of you that are concearned about their own privacy, contact the European entities as indicated in our other posts. Indicate Yatedo to them as a privacy breaching company, and describe your experience with them, the fact that they refuse to cancell your profiles and private data, etc.

Professional opinions about Yatedo

Privacy professionals are supporting us with information and opinions about Yatedo. Answering our question "How can you protect your privacy from third party data aggregators?", Geregory McHugh, Assistant Director at Medicare Australia, points out the complexity of the issue.

Looking at the Yatedo site it can be seen that the entity operates from France, Belgium, China and an International site. This creates a problem in determining in which legal jurisdiction this entity operates and which Privacy Law (if any!) applies to its operations. The law needs to catch up on these extra jurisdictional issues. I think tighter national control of domain names is necessary. I believe irrespective of the nation the entity exists it must comply with the laws of the nation in which the domain name is registered. The next challenge is the development of an accepted international definition for personal information and laws restricting it's collection. As a profession we must push for these for these changes and the Yatedo site is an example of why this is necessary. Gregory McHugh 

The observation is a good one and underlines the need for International legislation and actions. Nevertheless, contacting the European privacy protection bodies should help out for the Yatedo issue as they are supposed to be a French enterprise (thus should be compliant with the European legislation).