With the GDPR on the horizon, the EU is now overhauling and expanding the reach of the more specific privacy rules which relate to direct marketing, cookies and other forms of online monitoring. The ability of social media and messaging services to track users is one of many areas touched on in the European Commission's newly proposed ePrivacy Regulation, which was officially unveiled last week. We highlight some key impacts for the tech and media sectors, provided the proposed draft passes through the legislative process without dramatic changes. Businesses should incorporate these new requirements into their GDPR readiness planning. Why are the rules being updated?
Yesterday, 10 January, the European Commission (EC) presented its formal proposals for the new ePrivacy Regulation. On initial analysis, the first official draft of the Regulation appears broadly similar to last month's leaked version, explored by Datonomy here. Datonomy will be providing a fuller analysis, however in the meantime the EC's Fact Sheet provides a useful starting point. The Commission's aim is to have the new Regulation adopted by 25 May 2018 when the GDPR takes effect. Olswang's Head of Digital and Data, Elle Todd, and Alex Dixie, the firm's Head of Adtech, will be taking a first look at the practical impacts of the new proposals in a webinar at 15:00 UK time on Thursday 19 January. Follow this link to register. In particular the webinar will examine:
- changes in the scope of the new regime to cover … Continue Reading ››
Just before the festive break, the Article 29 Working Party ("WP29"), the group representing national data protection regulators in the EU, issued new guidance on several key aspects of the new General Data Protection Regulation ("GDPR"). This is the first guidance of its kind issued by the WP29, and as such represents the first time the data protection authorities have revealed their thoughts on the interpretation of the GDPR. The guidance consists of three separate sets of guidelines and FAQs:
- an explanation of the role of the now mandatory Data Protection Officer ("DPO");
- a guide to the new right to data portability; and
- guidance regarding the "one stop shop" mechanism for establishing the lead data protection authority in cases of cross-border data processing.
Yesterday (13 December) in time-honoured tradition, a draft proposal of the European Commission's (EC) new ePrivacy Regulation was leaked. The official draft of the proposal is not expected to be published by the EC until January 2017, and it is possible some of the detail will change before then. Datonomy will be providing fuller analysis of the real thing in the near future, but an initial look at the leaked draft – which (typos aside) gives a good indication of what to expect - reveals the following:
- It's a Regulation rather than a Directive (as predicted by Datonomy here)
- A fining regime similar to GDPR
Last week, as part of Olswang's GDPR readiness and Talking Retail webinar series', lawyers from the firm's data protection and retail sector teams hosted a webinar looking at the implications of the GDPR on the use of data by the retail industry during an online transaction. In this session our speakers looked at the following:
- Targeted and non-targeted advertising
- Privacy policies
- Processing customer payment details
- Post purchase analysis
- Data breaches
- GDPR implementation
- Sven Schonhofen, an associate in the Commercial Team of the Munich office. He specializes in advising clients in all areas of IT law, in particular on data protection law.
- Emily Dorotheou, an associate in the Commercial Team who has experience of working on procurement, technology and logistics contracts for a variety of retail and technology clients.
On 19 October 2016, the European Court of Justice rendered a decision in the infamous Breyer case, which provided more clarification as to the qualification of personal data in our continuously growing digital economy. The Court ruled that dynamic IP addresses can constitute personal data even when the data controller must seek additional information from a third party in order to truly identify a person. The implications of this outcome are not to be underestimated, especially given the liability and compliance obligations of controllers, which are a lot more lenient when the data in question is not considered "personal" data. It also remains to be seen how this decision will relate to the harmonization attempts of the GDPR as Breyer seems to leave the door open for interpretation depending on other national laws that affect the concept of personal data. Dynamic IP addresses The case was referred to the CJEU … Continue Reading ››