Can't find what you're looking for? Try the search bar!
My reading right now – the ICO recognising (unlike the EDPB) the relative nature of personal data and the moving scale of identifiability. This guidance on Pseudonymisation & Anonymisation looks more promising than what the EDPB had published! Link: https://lnkd.in/eN7DacRV GDPR privacy data protection
Are Guidelines of the European Data Protection Board “challengeable acts”, and could you attack them before the General Court of the EU? What about Art. 64 GDPR Opinions of the EDPB? The Advocate General’s Opinion in the WhatsApp v EDPB case (re EDPB Binding Decisions) suggests that the answer could be “yes” regarding those Art. […]
Not convinced by the reasoning of CJEU Advocate General Szpunar in the Inteligo Media case on the notion of “direct marketing”. Why? (i) The reasoning on Art. 13(2) of the ePrivacy Directive (ePD) seems flawed. The AG suggests that “Article 13(2) [ePD] deals comprehensively with the question of consent” (para. 50) and that its lex specialis […]
A step towards EDPB accountability? Advocate General sides with WhatsApp in CJEU case on whether EDPB binding decisions can be challenged directly. Sure, it’s “just” an AG Opinion, but it’s well researched and argued. What it says: 1. What is a challengeable act? The AG says that some circumstances are *irrelevant* to assessing whether an […]
NOYB-instigated Belgian DPA decision overturned on appeal for abuse of data subject rights. Key excerpt below, but paragraphs 29-38 of the judgment of the Market Court will be of interest to anyone facing data protection / GDPR complaints that are coordinated by litigating organisations – though the same reasoning may not be accepted in all […]
Readers will know that some of the EDPB’s positions in its pseudonymisation guidelines are unconvincing or absolutist by nature. Now, IAB Europe and other associations in the digital ecosystem have submitted their feedback on these guidelines, and the feedback shows the acute need for a review of those guidelines. This response is well worth the […]
Three points of interest (also beyond Belgium) taken from the Belgian data protection authority’s new decision regarding bpost (postal services): – Legitimate interests can be a valid legal ground for direct marketing (this is already well known throughout the European Union, but it’s worth repeating, considering the opposite view that the Dutch Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens continues […]
PayOrOkay [I’ll surely get shot for writing this:] 39 members of the European Parliament write to Meta to say that the right to privacy is “no” [I assume “not”] “something you should have to purchase” and that “[s]tudies” [citation needed] “suggest that contextual advertising is nearly as profitable as surveillance-based advertising”. Honestly, I preferred the […]
Podcast episode on GDPR (“what is personal data?”), ePrivacy (“what requires consent? or not?”), adtech (TCF notably) and “Pay or OK” – a fantastic conversation with Alan Chapell on The Monopoly Report. So much still to talk about, so we’ll see if a follow-up comes! Here are some links (42min): – on the Monopoly Report […]
CJEU confirms in new judgment that if you use automated decision-making, you are not required to reveal your algorithm(s) to data subjects (para. 59), but you might be required to “inform the data subject of the extent to which a variation in the personal data taken into account would have led to a different result” […]