EDPB sends binding instruction to Irish DPC to ban Meta's processing of personal data for behavioural advertising permanently across the EU/EEA.
According to a press release by the Norwegian DPA, the ban will include Facebook and Instagram and prevents Meta from using the legal bases of 6(1)(b) (Contract) or 6(1)(f) (Legitimate Interest) under GDPR and must instead obtain consent.
Norwegian DPA also states that Meta's plans to introduce paid subscription would be illegal.
The basis of the Norwegian DPA's position comes from Article 7 and Recital's 42 & 43 of the GDPR which sets the requirements for consent and what constitutes freely given consent.
Recital 43 states that consent will not be considered as freely given if it is a condition of access to a service where the processing of personal data is not necessary for the provision of that service.
@privacyint I note that lots of people are criticising the Tribunal decision in the Clearview case but it is not the fault of the tribunal, it is the fault of ICO.
The Tribunal made their judgment based on the fallacy that Clearview only used the data for law enforcement purposes - this is absolutely not the case and it is ICO's fault for not correcting this fallacy during the case.
@privacyint in her book "Your face belongs to us" Kashmir Hill discusses at length the business models of Clearview over the years, based on first hand whistleblowing testimony from one of the founders.
It is clear from the exposé that Clearview had already scanned billions of photos and were using their model for private business clients for years before they moved into the law enforcement market.
@privacyint the technology (anmd the faces) were being used for retailers, banks, hotels and other businesses years before they moved into the law enforcement market.
They also provided access to multiple private individuals (mostly potentially hedge funds and investors) including people such as Ashton Kutcher who admitted to having private access to the app in his "Hot Ones" interview on YouTube.
@privacyint Had the tribunal been made aware that this data was being used for private business long before law enforcement, they would have been forced to arrive t a different conclusion and the fine would have likely been permitted to stand.
They didn't, that is on ICO not the tribunal for not dong their research and not providing the Tribunal with the legal arguments and evidence to support their position.
@happyborg no the new text explicitly prevents interference with e2ee - wait to see the text (I have seen some of it in a call earlier today with the EP) obviously I cannot cover everything in the text in a single post (it is a long document) and I can't really "leak" more than a summary or I might not be invited to such calls in the future.
@happyborg but trust me - you will be pleased with the result. It is not perfect and it is still a fight we have to continue against the Commission and Council - but it is a long way from where we were even a week ago and should be seen as a very positive move forward.
"People in the UK consumed less #meat last year than at any point since records began in the 1970s, in a trend driven by the cost of living crisis, the continued impact of Covid and broader lifestyle changes."
@simon LLMs by definition, are anthropomorphic - that is the entire point of them - to mimic human speech - it is literally their entire reason to exist.
Spent most of the drive to the airport thinking about what words would have the most impact during my limiting speaking time at the European Parliament today.
You see, this isn’t like a business meeting - I might only get 3-5 minutes to speak so choosing the right words with the most impact is incredibly important.
I don’t have 10 000 words like I did for my thesis, I don’t have a 60 minute keynote, I have about 3-5 minutes to explain why the #csam proposal is dangerous for #fundamentalrights
3-5 minutes to persuade the Parliament not to pass a law that will lead to the total and complete surveillance of all digital communications in the EU.
3-5 minutes on such a complex issue involving the sexual abuse of children.
Lot's of people asking me why I filed a complaint against #YouTube for their illegal deployment of #spyware to detect #adblockers instead of simply paying for YouTube Premium.
The answer is simple - YouTube Premium has no ads but Google still use it to profile you for advertising on their other products.
I refuse to pay for any service which doesn't respect my fundamental rights.
And so should everyone else, because until they do, Alphabet will continue with their illegal #surveillance.
Scoop: Hackers Stole Access Tokens from Okta’s Support Unit
Okta, a company that provides identity tools like multi-factor authentication and single sign-on to thousands of businesses, has suffered a security breach involving a compromise of its customer support unit, KrebsOnSecurity has learned. Okta says the incident affected a “very small number” of customers, however it appears the hackers responsible had access to Okta’s support platform for at least two weeks before the company fully contained the intrusion.
Die guten @epicenter_works haben ein Telefonietool entwickelt über das man EU-Parlamentarier kostenfrei anrufen kann, um seine Meinung zur #Chatkontrolle kundzutun.
Damit da keine offene Türen eingerannt werden, sondern Parlamentarier angerufen werden, die das nötig haben, wird auch eine Liste der informationsbedürftigen Parlamentarier zur Verfügung gestellt.
To all the people crying about "Why shouldn't YouTube be allowed to make money from ads!"
If I print a newspaper entirely funded through advertising revenue - and you pick up a free copy, do you think it is ok for me to break in to your house to make sure you are looking at the ads?
Because that is what YouTube are doing when they deploy their spyware to detect #adblockers #privacy is a #fundamentalright - fight for it or lose it.
@havn there is no fundamental right of "Companies can force you to watch ads" believe me there have been several lawsuits to try to force this (just ask Eyeo) but they have all failed.
We all have the right not to consume advertising, period. To force otherwise would be a breach of not just privacy but our autonomy and agency.
Today I filed a formal complaint against #YouTube with the Irish Data Protection Commissioner for their illegal deployment of #adblock detection technologies.
Under Article 5(3) of 2002/58/EC YouTube are legally obligated to obtain consent before storing or accessing information already stored on an end user's terminal equipment unless it is strictly necessary for the provisions of the requested service.
In 2016 the EU Commission confirmed in writing that adblock detection requires consent.
@feld@AlgorithmWolf sure I charge 400 euros per hour for legal research - send me your billing info and I will get right to it (on Wednesday when I get back from speaking at the EU Parliament about privacy law)