Lee & White

On 25th of June 2013, the Belgian Privacy Commission and the Ministry of Justice entered into a protocol agreement which forms the framework for the transfer of personal data outside the EU. Following this, contracts governing the exchange of personal data between companies outside the EU will be handled more smoothly from now on.

The immense volume of personal data transferred between countries has rightly demanded the need for the protection of such personal data. Where the data is transferred within Belgium and the EU, personal data may be transferred subject to the Belgian Data Protection Law. EU member states are accorded the same level of protection for the processing of personal data by virtue of the European Directive 95/46/EC.

Where the data is transferred outside the EU, personal data can only be transferred to countries which provide an adequate level of protection of the data - similar to the protection accorded within the EU. The European Commission has recognised a number of countries which are regarded as providing an adequate level of protection of personal data. This can be viewed on the European Commission's website.

Where a country is not recognised as offering an adequate level of protection, personal data may still be transferred through:

• European Commission's model contracts or contractual clauses drawn up by organizations themselves offering an adequate level of protection of the personal data to be transferred
• Binding Corporate Rules
• Exceptions provided by law.

In Belgium, where the European Commission's model contracts are used, these contracts are sent to the Belgian Privacy Commission to be checked to ensure conformity with the European Commission's standard contractual clauses. There is however, no need for a Royal Decree to validate such contracts and this has been clearly stated in the recent protocol agreement between the Belgian Privacy Commission and the Ministry of Justice. The date on which conformity with the standard contractual clauses is confirmed in writing by the Privacy Commission is also the date on which the data transfer is allowed.

In the second instance where organizations themselves draw up their own contractual clauses binding themselves and the receivers of the personal data, the existing situation is such that a Royal Decree is necessary. However, owing to the shared jurisdiction of the Belgian Privacy Commission and the Ministry of Justice, the process became long and cumbersome and meant that very few organizations took up this method of providing an adequate level of protection.

The protocol agreement has changed that - the Privacy Commission will now play the leading role in this procedure and quicken the process. Organizations can send the contracts to the Privacy Commission for review. If the necessary guarantees for the protection of personal data are in place, the Privacy Commission will forward these contracts to the Ministry of Justice along with a positive assessment and a proposed wording for a Royal Decree for the King's signature and publication in the Belgian Official Gazette. If not, the Privacy Commission will contact the applicant and refer to the principles which are required to be addressed properly in the contractual clauses.

The new procedure will significantly shorten the period of approval of such contracts and is said to be a win-win situation for the government, organizations and citizens. It will also prevent the possible consequences of violation and provide more legal certainty for the data subjects whos personal data is transferred as well as the organizations involved. The protocol agreement takes effect immediately.

Facebook, as mentioned in detail in the news, was exposed for keeping shadow profiles on users and non-users.

Through an incident (which should have been classified as a bug as it had been available for months) it was revealed that Facebook is keeping so-called shadow profiles of its users as well as data subjects who do not use their services.

A shadow profile is information about a certain data subject which the data subject in question did not give to the data processor. This profile is created without consent of the data subject and possibly without his knowledge. This means the data processor gathered this information through or by combining other sources, either through other data subjects or from other sources such as other web sites, chat sessions, search history, phone conversations…

European Data Protection law forbids this kind of ‘data brokerage’, gathering, combining and reprocessing data from different sources to build a file with personal data for these reasons:

• Data processors can only process your data with your explicit consent.
• Data processors can only process such personal data which is relevant to their services to you.

Your personal data has become a commodity which they use for their own profit and without a relationship with you, the data subject. Quite a number of companies, small and large, have made it their business to gather everybody’s personal data and sell it on to the highest bidder. Recent times have made it very easy for such companies to gather all information in an automated way and from the comfort of their own office. They are also not bothered by the fact that they are serving stale information which is no longer or never was correct, but can have very deep implications on your personal life.

European Data Protection Law has several safeguards:

• If a data subject suspects a data processor has such a shadow profile, the law provides a means to officially request a complete list of data kept by the data processor concerning the data subject.
• If a data subject objects to the data processor’s use of the data subject’s data, the data subject can submit a request to cease processing such data.
• The new EU Data Protection proposal mentions the right to be forgotten, but lobbying by major data processors is probably going to water this down.

The lessons for our clients are clear:

• Be transparent, only gather personal data from your data subjects through informed and explicit consent.
• Do not process other information than that given by the data subject and only if it is relevant to the purpose of your relationship with the data subject.
• Keep it alive, keep data up to date and do not keep data of data subjects beyond the duration of the relationship with your data subject.
• Protect the personal data entrusted to you.

Google's Eric Schmidt spoke about privacy at its annual Big Tent event in Watford, about the use and misuse of personal data gathered and kept by his company. Whilst we cannot comment whether they walk the talk, we do need to take note of some of the points he made:

We (you ed.) need to fight for privacy or we are going to lose it

Yes we are - if we haven't lost it already. Our personal data is everywhere and just about anyone knows who we are and what we do - to the smallest details. And if they don't yet, they know how to get it.

We are being observed willingly and unwillingly, and are spreading very detailed and sensitive information about ourselves. These days, anyone can pick up a name and put a face and all the trimmings, and they would identify us spot on. It's not difficult to put the pieces together - especially if it is lying about everywhere, like a cookie trail right to your doorstep.

So yes, we do need to keep striving to keep control over our personal data. This is both a task for the data subjects (i.e. you) and the data controllers (i.e. the organisations, but also you).

There's this concern that we (Google ed.) are somehow going to misuse this data and we're not telling you.

Is it only concern? Perhaps, the feelings go deeper...

• coercion - the feeling that you are forcing them to give you their personal data because your services are needed and there are really no alternatives.
• suspicion - the feeling that you are going to sell them to the highest bidder.
• distrust - the feeling that they cannot trust you,  know that you are in fact not to be trusted - but cannot do a thing about it.
• concern - yes, the overall wondering and worrying about what you are going to do with their personal data and for how long.

Do they ever have that ultimate control of their property or it is all a lie?

The solution is simple - be truthful and honest about your processing. It sounds like a lesson in ethics and morality, but yes, that is the bottom line. Say what you are doing and going to do, and do what you say. Set this out in a clear and complete privacy policy stating what you will and will not do with their personal data, how they can count on you to do so or question you if you do not.

I (Eric Schmidt ed.) can assure from a privacy perspective... we would lose you and not get you back.

That's right, you won't get them back.

Google has a "clear business incentive" to protect user's data; do it properly or lose your business. Not handling personal data properly, not keeping the relationship with your data subject (i.e. the person behind the 'customer', 'supplier' or 'prospect') will make you lose them. Perhaps not immediately, as perhaps you are delivering a service which they need and only you can supply, but certainly in the longer term, when an alternative company rises which offers the same services and which does handle personal data properly.

So, are you going to start handling the personal data under your care properly, or are you waiting for that competitor to do so first?

Getting to know you, getting to know all about you... sounds familiar, but unfortunately, it has nothing to do with Rodgers and Hammerstein's musical The King and I, nor is there an ounce of good, wholesome fondness to that phrase.

Rather, the phrase is cloaked with an ulterior motive - Money, Money, Money (and this is not with reference to ABBA's song).

What's wrong with that? Everyone is entitled to pursue that ultimate goal, and surely everyone does - or at least tries to make more money.

True. Perhaps it is safe to say that every business is set up for the purpose of making money, and more money if possible. The question in any business case for an expense is whether there will be a profit to gain - apart from ensuring the customers' happiness and satisfaction, of course.

Alright, enough about the musical influences, and down to more serious business.

Businesses are trying to get to know you. They want to get to know you better. The better they know you, the better they can get more out of you. To do just that, they need your personal information - from your name to how you spend your leisure time, every bit counts. This desire to obtain personal information is not new of course. But how far is that desire corresponding with the individual's best interest? The privacy right?

By researching and analysing an individual's browsing habits on its e-commerce site, coupled with his/her personal information already obtained, an online retailer is able to advertise products/services which are most relevant to that individual.

It is also the case for those companies/retailers which seek to match the type of products/services/brands to the individual customer's taste. Shops with their own payment cards to facilitate quicker payments at the till (to obtain a card, just fill in your personal information in the given form) analyse the information obtained at every purchase (of the type and quantity of things bought...) to send catalogues relevant to the individual customer/household. If toys/stationery items are the most frequent products purchased, the customer finds a catalogue filled with the latest promotions on toys/stationery items in his/her mailbox.

To an extent, it does seem quite harmless as the individual gets what he is interested in and it does save his time and effort in looking for the 'right' or 'most suitable' product/service/brand. And better yet, businesses carrying out these forms of advertising are actually saving cost. No more unwanted, wasted printing materials. No more spending a fortune on advertising products which a particular individual will never take a second glance at.

A very recent report in the New York Times showed that companies can even make predictions about their customers.

Companies can learn your secrets. 

A statistician from Target, a large retailer from the US, divulged that two colleagues from Target's marketing department popped the odd question, "If we want to figure out if a customer is pregnant, even if she didn't want us to know, can you do that?"

Timing is essential in this case. As most new parents are almost immediately bombarded with offers and advertisements on baby products from the moment the birth records are made public, the key is to get this group before any other retailer knows that a baby is on the way. By being able to identify these mothers-to-be as early as their second trimester (the time when most of these women are changing their lives and buying pre-natal vitamins, maternity clothing and baby stuff) the chances of keeping them for years to come are great. These women are then likely to buy diapers from Target, pass by the baby food aisle and grab a box or two, and on the way to the till, add a few more items to the cart. Once the customers get comfortable with the offered products, they will keep coming back - and for more.

The questions for the businesses are:

• Did you tell the individuals clearly that you were doing/are doing/will do this?
• Did you give them a chance to opt out?
• Did you ensure that the individuals can always exercise their rights under the data protection law any time?
• Are you ensuring the security of their personal information both organisationally and technically?
• Can you ensure that if there is a transfer/sharing of their personal information to third parties, that these third parties will ensure an adequate level of protection of their personal information too?

Answer all these with a YES, and you're likely to be a trusted organisation and you understand the business case for privacy. Privacy is profitable. Personal information is an asset. You protect that asset and you will gain trust, the customers that go with it and the profit that comes from doing business with them.

The questions for the individual are:

• Did you ask for any of this?
• Did you ask for your shopping behaviour to be scrutinised? checked? spied on?
• Are you aware of all that they know about you?
• Do you mind that they can build your profile almost spot on?
  For example, Spying On You Mart knows that Mr.Joe Customer who lives at 123 No Privacy Lane and shops at Spying On You Mart, has an estimated salary of $$$. He has at least one son and one daughter (judging from purchases of boys and girls toys) of the ages between 5-8 years of age (judging from the age group of the toys purchased) and potentially has a wife/female partner who is a size 38 (EU) (again judging from the several pieces of female clothing purchased) and they like barbecuing in the summer and eat Activia yoghurts.
• And with this information that they have about you, do they share it with third parties?
• And if they do, what are those third parties going to do with it?
• Will they protect that information from getting into the wrong hands?
• Did you opt in without realising?
• Can you ever stop them if you wanted/needed to?

Answer all these with a YES, and you've consented with full knowledge and with full trust in that organisation. If you can truly exercise your rights as a data subject, and know that that organisation is protecting and will continue to protect your personal information,  then the protection of your personal information is upheld and the duty of that organisation to you is fulfilled.

But in all cases, think very carefully, read the fine print, and do not give your personal information out unless you know what you're in for, your rights and how to get out. Otherwise, it's Hush Little Baby, Don't Say A Word.

"Privacy law is not allowing us to do this", "We're not allowed to do that". But what can proper personal data management, protection and handling actually do for you... Create business!

On our many encounters we regularly have lively discussions with professionals of all backgrounds and all levels, not surprisingly quite often on our favourite subject, personal data protection and management.

Most feedback we receive however, is related to the repressive perception of data protection law, and how it does not align with the commercial goals and roadmap of the organisation, more likely to limit rather than to offer opportunities.

What we try to explain in such cases, is that the law on the one hand forbids and regulates, but on the other hand enables and guides.

The law forbids that you do anything illegal with the data and use it in a way that can harm the individual identified by the data. It regulates the way that the individual can keep control over his property, i.e. his personal data, and what purposes this data can be used for.

On the other hand, the law creates the framework that allows you to handle personal data and guides both yourself and the data subjects on how to interact in an official and transparent way. You stay in full control but if you mess up, the law is there to enable the individual data subject to exercise his rights.

The basis of the law is the relationship between you and the data subject.

• It needs to be a live relationship.
• Both parties need to be in control.
• New relationships with other parties only with permission and knowledge of the data subject.
• The relationship needs to be transparent.
• Once the relationship ends, the data is no longer of any use and should not be used anymore.

The benefits are many:
As a company, you have many individuals with whom you regularly interact and who support you fully. You do not waste time on stale or dead relationships and do not waste resources on it. Your investment in personal data yields the maximum return. You send out communications to people who want to hear from you and will hear what you have to say.

As an individual, you know which companies you are working with and what they are doing with your information. Once you decide to move on, you know your personal data is not retained and can never be abused.

The downsides of not following this guidance:
As a company, your databases, cupboards and backup tapes are clogged down with stale information of people whom you once worked with but might never work with again. The information of 'live' relationships is hidden and lost in the noise of 'stale' data.

As an individual, your data is lingering forever and you have no control over what will happen with it. Will it end up in the company's archive forever, or in a hacker's database, or somewhere on a hard disk on eBay?

In our personal data workshops, we help every department within organisations maximize the full potential of handling personal data, exploring new potential and advising on ways of using the personal data, within the limits and spirit of the several international data protection legislations. The combination of the detailed knowledge and experience of our team in all related disciplines (data protection law, CRM, marketing, online presence, social networking) together with the knowledge, experience and market savvy of your team, creates novel and powerful new applications with many quick wins and long term benefits.

More information on our Personal Data Workshops and other services can be found here.

It is looking good for Data Protection in Belgium and the EU as Ms. Viviane Reding, Vice-President of the European Commission and EU Commissioner for Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship, announced groundbreaking changes to EU Data Laws to be introduced in a Bill to the EU Parliament this week.

Speaking at the “Digital, Life, Design” conference in Munich on January 22^nd, 2012, she confirmed that personal data is indeed an asset, a  message which has already begun passing around since the UK Information Commissioner commissioned a report on privacy by design to help articulate the business case for proactive protection of privacy in 2008 and which we believe and preach with conviction. “Personal Data is the currency of today’s digital market, and like any currency, it needs stability and trust. Only if consumers can ‘trust’ that their data is well protected, will they continue to entrust businesses and authorities with it, buy online, and accept new services.”, she stated. And the amount of data, including Personal Data, is growing by a whopping 40% a year worldwide.

Given the fact that 72% of European Citizens said in a recent poll that they are concerned about how their personal data is used by companies, and given that businesses are concerned too, how can they keep control over data which races around the globe in a virtual cloud?

“Trust has to prevail”, states Ms. Reding. Rightly so. If the population is to give the current growth continued support, they need to have a good understanding of the issues and be able to trust that their data is not being abused. They entrust the EU with the task to draw up the rules and follow up on their correct implementation and execution. Trust is the key to any relationship - and how much more in the business world?

We have a unified currency in the EU, but Data Protection law is fragmented into 27 different, and sometimes conflicting, regulations. Whilst some member states are top of the class, others have watered the 1995 EU Directive down so much that it is no more than a sign on the wall showing how bad things are. A lot of burden has been added, sometimes in the form or red tape and lengthy cumbersome administrative procedures. As such, it has all been a futile exercise as it missed its economic goal.

Ms. Reding states “Privacy concerns are one of the most frequent reasons why people don’t buy goods and services online.”. She is adamant about the way forward: “This needs to be changed.”

Two legislative texts will be proposed:

“First, a Regulation to enhance opportunities for companies that want to do business in the EU's internal market, while ensuring a high level of data protection for individuals.

Second, a Directive to ensure a smoother exchange of information between Member States' police and judicial authorities in the fight against serious crime while at the same time protecting people’s fundamental right to data protection.”

The first point, legal certainty, will be achieved by one Data Protection Law in the form of a directly applicable Regulation which will apply to all Member States in the European Union, and to all organisations offering their goods and services to consumers in the EU – even if their servers are based outside the EU.

This new Regulation will unleash the potential of the Digital Single Market, and will save businesses around 2.3 billion Euros per year, removing barriers to market entry, which were especially affecting our clients, the small and medium-sized enterprises. It will simplify the regulatory environment and drastically cut red tape. Current notification requirements are replaced by a duty for companies to be responsible and accountable for the protection of Personal Data in their business field. Each company will have to appoint a Data Protection Officer.

There will be one law, applicable to all member states, and companies will only have to deal with a single Data Protection Authority linked to the country of its main establishment.

All Data Protection Authorities will have the same adequate tools and powers to enforce the EU Law.

They will:

• Deal with complaints
• Carry out investigations
• Take binding decisions
• Impose effective and dissuasive sanctions.

The rules for international data transfers will be strengthened and simplified - a necessary step in a world where data travels freely around the world and major companies have made it their specialty to circumvent the more ‘difficult’ countries by operating in or via countries with weaker Data Protection legislation.

Trust from the individuals will be earned through a few key principles, boiling down to one point: Transparency.

• Informed
  • People need to be informed in simple, clear, and unambiguous language.
• Consent
  • People need to freely give their specific and informed consent.
• Control
  • People need to have control over their own data at all time. Aside from the control we know already, it will also include portability, the possibility to take one’s data and easily move it from one provider to another, and the right, not the option, to be forgotten.
• Alert
  • Individuals need to be swiftly informed, within 24 hours, when any of their personal data is lost or stolen.
  • Companies suffering such a breach need to notify their Data Protection Authority without undue delay, i.e. ‘within 24 hours’.

Ms. Reding concludes:

"We will get a strong, consistent and future-proof framework for data protection, applied consistently across all Member States and across all European Union policies. We will make our data protection legislation fit for the digital age so it encourages innovation and development of new technologies and services.

We will adjust the rules to the reality of multinational businesses. And will adjust the rules to the reality of people's lives. Europeans live, work, shop and travel freely in the EU, so their data must travel freely as well: Freely and safely. The reform will become a golden opportunity for business: complying with the EU’s laws on data protection will lead to a competitive advantage. European data protection rules will become a trademark people recognise and trust worldwide. I would welcome if everyone here put these new rules to life."

Well said. Data Protection without a doubt enables businesses to make more and better business, leading to a competitive advantage over competitors, having a solid and healthy relationship with loyal customers. Any organisation would pay good money for this.

You can read the full text of Ms. Reding's speech here

It will take some time to bring the new law into practice, but organisations should be aware and prepared, making the necessary changes sooner rather than later.

If you need to assess your current status with relation to the new Data Protection Law or need advice on implementing or improving compliance with current or the next legislation, review our services and contact us.

Cloud computing, it is a hot topic these days. But what is it all about?

Basically, it describes technologies to deliver software as a service. The cloud provider provides processing power, software, data access, and storage in order to deliver services to the consumer of the cloud services.

How does it look from your end of the screen? Compare it to your water supplier; at the end of the day, the average user would probably require that when he turns on the tap, water comes out. The more concerned user would be a bit more interested in the quality and origin of the water coming out.

A better parallel with regard to your data however would be the attended cloakroom. You would arrive at the theatre and hand your coat to the cloakroom attendant in exchange for a numbered ticket. After the show, you would hand the ticket to the attendant in order to have your coat returned.

So as a user (the data subject), you would hand your personal data to a company (the data controller) you trust, and this company would store your data or process it in ‘the cloud’ through his cloud provider (a data processor).

If the attended cloakroom is unattended (after closing hours) or in case of an emergency, you could browse through the coat hangers in the cloak room and find your coat. What if it wasn’t there, what if the cloakroom had ‘outsourced’ storing the coats? You would appreciate a sign saying ‘We outsource our coat storage to external sites in x, y and z’. You could still go to x, y and z and retrieve your coat.

With data however, nobody is guaranteeing that the data is stored completely in one location, it might be distributed over multiple data stores. It is also not guaranteed that the data is stored only once, only that it is stored at least once. And no guarantees that if data is deleted or moved, it is physically removed or erased in the original location.

So what can we learn from this short story:
It is vital that everybody involved knows where the data resides, handles it with care and only for as long as needed and wanted, keeps it safe from abuse, and deletes it when no longer needed.

Data Controller

• Draw up and adhere to rules regarding handling personal data. (data handling procedures)
• Draw up and implement procedures to allow data subjects to execute their legal rights under the Data Protection Law.
• Ensure your subcontractors abide by the same rules you impose on yourself.
• Inform your data subjects of these rules, be transparent. (privacy statement)
• Audit yourself regularly to check adherence to your rules and the Data Protection Law.
• Audit your subcontractors to check the above.
• Be vigilant!

Data Subject

• Read the information provided by the data controller before handing over your personal data.
• Execute your legal rights under the Data Protection Law.
• Stay in control of your personal data, know who is using it and what for.
• Be vigilant!

And finally. if in doubt, do not hand over your personal data and look for another provider.

Despite many obvious reasons for ensuring both technical and organisational security measures within a company, many companies (don't be surprised) are yet to implement these.

Unrestricted access to server rooms (for purposes which will set you on the floor laughing, but sadly true), sharing of passwords between colleagues, unlocked cabinets, messy desks with confidential information displayed for all eyes, non-secure company websites collecting personal data, and so on. If you're nodding to all these as you read, then you've got a company who is in breach of the Data Protection Law.

Now, last week on the news, Sony Pictures was humiliated when hacking group LulzSec claimed it had accessed unencrypted personal data of SonyPictures.com and Sony BMG's Websites in Belgium and the Netherlands. According to the group, getting the information was not that complex - gaining access to SonyPictures.com with a single SQL injection.

"What's worse is that every bit of data we took wasn't encrypted. Sony stored over 1,000,000 passwords of its customers in plaintext, which means it's just a matter of taking it," they claimed. "This is disgraceful and insecure: they were asking for it."

According to Beth Givens, director of Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, the attacks on Sony would seem to indicate lax practices on Sony's part. "These repeated Sony attacks are an object lesson for all companies," she said. "Sony has reported that it uses industry standards for security. If that's true, then perhaps it is time to re-evaluate and even go beyond such standards." (Read more: cnetNews)

It is clearly another lesson to be learnt. But, are companies learning or ignoring this important legal and moral duty to its customers? How many companies will take the appropriate security measures now, or will it depend on the budget and short term profit?

One of the largest corporate insurers was recently fined by Britain's financial regulator, the FSA for the loss of customer data. Zurich Insurance PLC was fined a record £2.3m for losing 46000 customers' personal information which included identification information, details of bank accounts, credit cards and insured assets which could have resulted in significant loss to customers.

The loss of customers' data dates back to August 2008 when Zurich Insurance had outsourced data work to the company's South African unit which lost an unencrypted back-up tape. The loss however, was not discovered until a year later.

Companies would benefit from learning from the mistakes that cost Zurich Insurance PLC not only £2.3m in fine, but also the loss of its customers' trust which is a valuable asset for any company.

"It served to remind us of the need to strive continually to improve the ways in which we seek to protect customers' data," said Stephen Lewis, chief executive of Zurich Insurance.

Now, what are you as a company doing to ensure that your customers' personal information is protected? Do you have a Personal Data Protection Policy in place in your company, and are your employees aware of them? It would do you well to look at this seriously and ensure you are protected by protecting your customers.

There was a recent case in the press about Google collecting and storing information broadcast over open Wi-Fi networks, attributed to the overzealous IT people who captured all data that they could technologically grab, and store it, just in case they might use it in the future.

This is a good example of what happens quite often in IT projects.

• The business owner has a great idea to use a new technology to boost sales or to develop a new product.
• The business analyst uses these ideas and draws up the business requirements and scope of a project to achieve this goal.
• The project manager executes the project and drives the IT and business teams to deliver the required code.

The whole process is monitored end to end by the data protection officer who

• Assesses the impact on personal data protection at the time the business owner intends to initiate the project
• Reviews and approves the business requirements and analysis documents, checking that personal data processing is
  • fair and lawful,
  • collected for the specific purpose of the project,
  • adequate, relevant and not excessive.
• Participates in status and scope meetings, guarding the above.
• Performs integration and user acceptance testing with a focus on personal data
• Gives the final go that a project can go live and it is not, now and in the future,
  • a risk to trust and reputation of the organisation, or
  • a violation of applicable data protection laws.

So far the theory. What happens quite often is that no dedicated data protection officer is assigned, and every party in this process, to the best of their ability and in good faith, do what they think is best.

• The business owner will want his new product to be fully compliant with best practices and data protection law, but hands it over to the project manager and fails to check these requirements at the end of the project.
• The business analyst draws up the business requirements, but limited by time and budget sometimes forgets to add the 'hidden' requirements of data protection.
• The project manager is stuck to a budget and will deliver it at any cost, dropping requirements from the scope if necessary at crunch time.
• The IT and business teams will try to get the maximum out of the new technology and add any features or use any new technology that they feel like or are intellectually challenged to use.

The solution is that the whole process of developing a project be monitored and audited end to end, and independent parties should be responsible for doing this. They should explicitely approve any step in the project, ensuring that the scope is strictly limited to what the project requires and no extra 'features' are added that can prove to be a very expensive overhead and liability further down the road, both in money and less tangible values.

Now for the case of Google, is removing the offending data the solution? No, because the offence was processing the data (gathering wifi signals) in the first place which cannot be undone.