Why businesses cannot afford to dismiss the corporate risk of deepfakes

Scarily powerful – don’t dismiss the risk of deep fakes for your company. With now tools like Deep Live Cam (“real time face swap and one-click video deepfake with only a single image”) making the rounds, it is imperative for you to educate *everyone* in your organisation about good reflexes regarding both cybersecurity and AI. […]

Read Analysis →

Google Tag Manager and the consent trap: a call for nuance

A months-old German court decision on Google Tag Manager has resurfaced here, with many claiming the GDPR applies to every use of GTM or similar tools. A bit of nuance may be useful: – First, that claim that the use of IP addresses and other identifiers = always processing of personal data? Let’s first wait […]

Read Analysis →

Digital Fairness Act: balancing consumer protection and innovation

So the Digital Fairness Act consultation process begins, with lofty yet potentially flawed goals. The Commissions wishes to notably: – “[prevent] traders from using dark patterns and other unfair techniques that pressure, deceive and manipulate consumers online – “[address] problematic personalisation practices, including situations where consumer vulnerabilities are targeted for the purposes of personalised advertising […]

Read Analysis →

Is the CrowdStrike IT outage truly a personal data breach under the GDPR?

My takeaways from the 100+ comment discussion following my post on whether the Crowdstrike incident is a “personal data breach” under the GDPR: 1. There are clearly two camps on this. I didn’t expect this level of opposition between two visions of what is a personal data breach. 2. One camp adheres to the views […]

Read Analysis →

The Hamburg DPA aligns on tracking tokens and behavioral identification

Glad to see the Hamburg DPA going in a similar direction as what I was suggesting in the post below: tokens should not be viewed as personal data. Even at the level of the output, “the mere presence of plausible personal information in LLM output is not conclusive evidence that personal data has been memorized, […]

Read Analysis →

Good & bad in judgment on Meta AI training & personal data (legitimate interests, sensitive data) + new French & German guidance

Does training of AI systems involve the processing of personal data, and is it permitted under the GDPR? These were the two fundamental questions that I have already looked into in two previous articles: On the date of that second article, the Cologne Higher Regional Court (the Oberlandesgericht Köln – the Cologne HRC) delivered a […]

Read Analysis →

ePrivacy precedent: critiquing the CJEU’s interpretation of spam

One to watch. Based on the summary of the hearing, this looks like a continuation of the CNIL’s Orange decision and of the CJEU’s SwTL v eprimo case – if so, I fear we are going down a path of bad legal precedent after bad legal precedent. As I have previously commented, the eprimo judgment […]

Read Analysis →

Belgian DPA: limiting complaint standing to protect mandate integrity

Mass rejection of NOYB complaints by Belgian DPA: repeating the cases I have commented before (see notably https://lnkd.in/eMGbdWPh), the Belgian DPA just rejected 16 complaints of NOYB in 5 different cases based on the fact that there was no actual (non-fictional) mandate by data subjects. In its press release (to explain the multiple rejections), the […]

Read Analysis →

GDPR Procedural Regulation: risks to the rights of defence

Lots of potential for violations of the rights of defence. My critical analysis: https://lnkd.in/e3xDp82T GDPR data protection privacy

Read Analysis →

Analyzing the GPR: concerns on admissibility and scope of complaints

The GDPR Procedural Regulation (GPR) raises practical concerns, based on the text of the provisional agreement of the EU Council & Parliament, notably re the scope of complaints. I was discussing it with Sara Brandstätter @ MLex (who obtained the text) – here are some key concerns of mine: 1) This GPR will likely have […]

Read Analysis →