Articles for tag: Brussels effect, Datenschutz, EU, EuGH

Data Retention in a Cross-Border Perspective

This blog post compares the European and US approach to metadata surveillance and highlights some challenges that arise therefrom. It aims at shedding light on the main legal issues that may arise for the future of global counterterrorism. The essential role of courts in striking and keeping a balance between security and protection of human rights is further examined in light of the judgement in La Quadrature du Net II. Efforts should be made to avoid that the economic power of the US would lower the privacy standards when it comes to metadata surveillance.

28. November 2024

, , ,

The Future of GDPR Enforcement

The ongoing trilogue negotiations on the GDPR procedural regulation aim to address significant enforcement shortcomings. From strengthening complainants' rights to harmonising Data Protection Authorities' discretion and improving cross-border cooperation, these discussions carry major implications for data protection in Europe. This analysis highlights the urgent need for reforms to ensure effective and fair enforcement.

28. November 2024

, , , , , , , , , ,

Die Vorratsdatenspeicherung

Die jüngeren Urteile des EuGHs zur Vorratsdatenspeicherung sind nicht als „kopernikanische Wende“ zu verstehen, in der der EuGH sein Selbstverständnis als Grundrechtsgericht aufgegeben hätte. Sie sind keine autoritär motivierte Abkehr von einer vormals grundrechtsfreundlichen Rechtsprechung. Vielmehr fügen sich die Urteile ein in die komplexe Entwicklung des ursprünglich national geprägten Sicherheitsverfassungsrechts. Diese Einordnung bedarf eines genaueren Blickes.

27. November 2024

, , , ,

Data Retention

The recent judgements of the CJEU on data retention should not be regarded as an authoritarian move towards a less fundamental rights-sensible position of the Court. Rather, the case law adapts the ever more complex development of the constitutional security law, which was originally dominated by the Member States. As a European court, the CJEU cannot simply ban certain police measures but must respect the complexity and heterogeneity of national law enforcement agencies.

27. November 2024

, , ,

Protecting Victims Without Mass Surveillance

Mass data retention is on the rise. In the current heyday of security packages in Germany, we are now witnessing a “super grand coalition” in favor of mandatory IP address retention. Some are calling for greater protection for victims through data retention. Yet, what one often overlooks is the following: The investigative capacities of law enforcement authorities have never been better, and the digital data pools that can be analyzed have never been larger. Hence, victims must be protected without mass surveillance.

26. November 2024

, , , , , , , , , ,

More Protection for Victims Through Data Retention

Mass data retention is all about proportionality. The threat level determines the proportionality of the means – both of which are subject to the perpetual flux of time. Data retention is intended to protect victims of digital crimes. To protect freedom online, our security services urgently need to be able to access stored IP addresses. The alarming developments in our security situation are calling many certainties from the past into question. This also involves a re-evaluation of traffic data retention.

26. November 2024

, , , , ,

Eyes Everywhere

Ten years after its groundbreaking judgment declaring the Data Retention Directive incompatible with the EU Charter, the Full Court significantly eased its previously strict requirements. On 30 April 2024, it issued La Quadrature Du Net II and, for the first time, declared the general and indiscriminate retention of IP addresses permissible for the purpose of fighting general crime. Given the CJEU’s fundamental change of heart, we have gathered a range of scholars to contextualize the judgment and situate it within the broader debate on mass data retention, online surveillance, and anonymity.

26. November 2024

, , , ,

Sicherheitsrechtliche Wende ohne Gefolgschaft

Morgen wird das Bundesverfassungsgericht über das Bundeskriminalamtsgesetz 2018 entscheiden. Das BVerfG dürfte mit seinem Urteil in erster Linie die Verfassungsmäßigkeit einiger informationeller Befugnisse des BKAG in den Blick nehmen, weniger hingegen die derzeitige Praxis bei der Verarbeitung von personenbezogenen Daten. Dass diese weit von den informationellen Befugnissen und verfassungsrechtlichen und unionsrechtlichen Maßstäben entfernt sind, zeigen unter anderem Dokumente, die auf mehrere Anträge nach dem Informationsfreiheitsgesetz herausgegeben wurden.

30. September 2024

, , , ,

In the Shadows

Recent investigations by Netzpolitik and the German public service broadcaster Bayerischer Rundfunk into the company Datarade have shed light on a part of the digital economy that has so far operated mainly in the background: data trading. The key players in this sector are data brokers, whose business model is to trade in (non-)personal data. Data trading is a multi-billion-dollar component of the global digital economy and not a new phenomenon. This article outlines the legal implications of data trading in the context of the GDPR, the DSA and the AI Act.

14. August 2024

, , ,

Proximity, Amicable Settlements, and how the EU Guts GDPR Enforcement

The EU legislator is working on a new Regulation to modify the GDPR. Unfortunately, the reform features deeply troubling elements. It seeks to mainstream a controversial Irish approach to dealing with data protection complaints, namely “amicable settlements” between individuals and digital corporations. Further, and rather problematically, the reform foreshadows the end of the principle of proximity. Gutting – or at least eroding – the proximity principle should ring alarm bells for anyone concerned with effective judicial remedies in the EU.

19. Juli 2024

, , ,