IAPP Certified Information Privacy Professional/Asia (CIPP/A) - CIPP-A 模擬練習

Which of the following topics was NOT addressed in India's Information Technology Act 2000 (IT Act)?

Which of the following is NOT a substantial source of privacy protection for Hong Kong citizens?

What was the basis for the "TrustSg" mark, which was designed to build confidence in e-commerce transactions before the PDPA was enacted?

Which of the following entities do NOT fall under India's Right to Information Act of 2005?

How can the privacy principles issued in 1980 by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) be defined?

In what way are Hong Kong citizens protected from direct marketing in ways that India and Singapore citizens are not?

What does NOT need to be considered when determining the retention schedule for sensitive personal data?

What personal information is considered sensitive in almost all countries with privacy laws?

SCENARIO - Please use the following to answer the next QUESTION:
Fitness For Everyone ("FFE") is a gym on Hong Kong Island that is affiliated with a network of gyms throughout Southeast Asi a. When prospective members of the gym stop in, call in or submit an inquiry online, they are invited for a free trial session. At first, the gym asks prospective clients only for basic information: a full name, contact number, age and their Hong Kong ID number, so that FFE's senior trainer Kelvin can reach them to arrange their first appointment.
One day, a potential customer named Stephen took a tour of the gym with Kelvin and then decided to join FFE for six months. Kelvin pulled out a registration form and explained FFE's policies, placing a circle next to the part that read "FEE and affiliated third parties" may market new products and services using the contact information provided on the form to Stephen "for the duration of his membership." Stephen asked if he could opt-out of the marketing communications. Kelvin shrugged and said that it was a standard part of the contract and that most gyms have it, but that even so Kelvin's manager wanted the item circled on all forms. Stephen agreed, signed the registration form at the bottom of the page, and provided his credit card details for a monthly gym fee. He also exchanged instant messenger/cell details with Kelvin so that they could communicate about personal training sessions scheduled to start the following week.
After attending the gym consistently for six months, Stephen's employer transferred him to another part of the Island, so he did not renew his FFE membership.
One year later, Stephen started to receive numerous text messages each day from unknown numbers, most marketing gym or weight loss products.
Suspecting that FFE shared his information widely, he contacted his old FFE branch and asked reception if they still had his information on file. They did, but offered to delete it if he wished. He was told FFE's process to purge his information from all the affiliated systems might take 8 to 12 weeks. FFE also informed him that Kelvin was no longer employed by FFE and had recently started working for a competitor. FFE believed that Kelvin may have shared the mobile contact details of his clients with the new gym, and apologized for this inconvenience.
Assuming that Kelvin received a commission for sharing his former client list with the new employer, and the new employer used Stephen's data to engage in direct marketing to Stephen, which of the following penalties could Kelvin face under Part VI A of the Ordinance?

Hong Kong's Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance (PDPO) was primarily inspired by which of the following?