21-03-2015, 12:26 PM
Sorry, Phil. I thought we’d agreed about the basic structure of the reforms set out in the new FIDE Regulations and their possible objective. (See our posts dated 6 March above). Now you seem to be swinging back to your original narrow and one-sided view.
There is a world of difference between the freedom of choice that the individual chess player may exercise and the duties and responsibilities that National Chess Federations bear. Here in UK, the NCFs are bound by the provisions of the Data Protection Act. You may look this up on the GOV.UK website. There, one ‘data protection principle’ states that ‘personal information may not be transferred outside the UK without adequate protection.’ Other points are just as compelling: ‘used fairly and lawfully’; ‘accurate’; ‘kept safe and secure’; ‘used for limited, specifically stated purposes’; ‘kept for no longer than is absolutely necessary’ etc. etc.
How does FIDE fit into this profile? Three points here. First, it’s waving a big stick, threatening punitive action in the event of non-compliance. [How does this relate to ‘used fairly and lawfully’?] Second, C 3.7 states: “FOA* licensing is irrelevant to the Federation of the players.” [There is a conflict here. NCFs are required to provide data, including valid email addresses, to help administer the FOA, but they themselves will not be involved in running it. It will all be done electronically from a central point? But where will that location be?] Third, the database of players’ personal data, including valid email addresses, seems geared to the marketing of FIDE events, including FOA. How does that square with the DPA here in the UK?
Personally, I think CS would be well advised not to stand alone on this matter but to seek an alliance or United Front with other NCFs that share their administrative and legal obligations.
Oh, … and a valid email address is sensitive information.
[* FOA stands for FIDE Online Arena]
There is a world of difference between the freedom of choice that the individual chess player may exercise and the duties and responsibilities that National Chess Federations bear. Here in UK, the NCFs are bound by the provisions of the Data Protection Act. You may look this up on the GOV.UK website. There, one ‘data protection principle’ states that ‘personal information may not be transferred outside the UK without adequate protection.’ Other points are just as compelling: ‘used fairly and lawfully’; ‘accurate’; ‘kept safe and secure’; ‘used for limited, specifically stated purposes’; ‘kept for no longer than is absolutely necessary’ etc. etc.
How does FIDE fit into this profile? Three points here. First, it’s waving a big stick, threatening punitive action in the event of non-compliance. [How does this relate to ‘used fairly and lawfully’?] Second, C 3.7 states: “FOA* licensing is irrelevant to the Federation of the players.” [There is a conflict here. NCFs are required to provide data, including valid email addresses, to help administer the FOA, but they themselves will not be involved in running it. It will all be done electronically from a central point? But where will that location be?] Third, the database of players’ personal data, including valid email addresses, seems geared to the marketing of FIDE events, including FOA. How does that square with the DPA here in the UK?
Personally, I think CS would be well advised not to stand alone on this matter but to seek an alliance or United Front with other NCFs that share their administrative and legal obligations.
Oh, … and a valid email address is sensitive information.
[* FOA stands for FIDE Online Arena]