Episodit
-
Once again, Pilvi and Jyri are joined by the legendary Joost, in another episode of Joost Case Corner and the magic of European Court of Justice (and Court of First Instance) case law!
In this episode, Pilvi and Jyri (with some connection issues but not to worry Phil and all Jyri fans–he’s there!) discuss the following cases with Joost Gerritsen:
Case T-354/22: Judgment of the General Court in Bindl v. Institutions, commission (Can an unlawful data transfer to the USA be annulled? Also, 400€ damages for an unlawful transfer of IP Address via Facebook by the EU. A case that highlights the importance of DPF and the difficulties to function if it should fall.)
Case C-394/23: Mousse Jan 9 2025 Association Mousse v Commission nationale de l'informatique et des libertés (CNIL) and SNCF Connect. (A data subject was forced to pick a salutation (monsieur/madame) when buying a train ticket because the train company wanted to send marketing, this case made us happy to live in Europe in these st/o+range times.)
Case C‑416/23, Österreiche Datenschutzbehörde (Can a Data Protection Authority tell a data subject to stop filing complaints and stick to no more than 2 complaints per month?)
We also take a look at what court cases are cooking in the Court of Justice of the European Union and ready for us to enjoy soon!‘
This episode will be a great treat while prepping for the end of the world, so do listen in!
Did you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us a coffee here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Instagram: @privacypod
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tietosuojapod/about/
Email: [email protected]
Links:
Case T-354/22:
https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2025-01/cp250001en.pdfCase C-394/23:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/fi/TXT/?uri=CELEX:62023CJ0394Case C‑416/23:
https://www.euractiv.com/section/tech/news/eu-court-rules-gdpr-complaints-cant-be-rejected-based-on-frequency/ -
It’s 2025 and the world is a little crazier… and more orange. So the tea is hot in the global privacy scene indeed, and Jyri and Pilvi are totally here for it. Not to worry, we don’t want to cause extra heartbeats this early in the year by speculating if the DPF will stand through this new orange era of madn…interesting times, but it is absolutely the right time to take a look at China.
We start with discussing the drama regarding TikTok and where we are with that and continue with the news that shook the markets and tech world: DeepSeek. Both cases are closely related to privacy concerns and international politics: what does this all look like from the EU’s perspective? The Italian Data Protection Authority is already on the case DeepSeek: what could possibly be their concerns? And how is NOYB after controllers connected to China?
We also discusst the power struggle between the Irish authority DPC and European Data Protection Board (EDPB) regarding a NOYB case where the EU Court had to intervene, the new EDPB position paper on the crossroads of competition law and privacy as well as the guideline on pseudonymisation. Oh, and we also go through some latest fines from France.
All this and much more from this disturbingly optimistic episode!
Did you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us a coffee here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Instagram: @privacypod
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tietosuojapod/about/
Email: [email protected]
-
Puuttuva jakso?
-
Today’s episode is perfect for the holiday season - or maybe you don’t want to think about work stuff during holidays? Oh well, you are very welcome to join the ride with Laura and Pilvi when they discuss consent or pay -models with Filip Sedefov.
What is the topic really about? Are we regulating/focusing on the right things? Is personal data a tradable commodity that you can exchange for free services? What has all this to do with the values we wish we had and what we actually live by? Is the pay or consent just about making money while stomping on people’s rights or can it actually be seen as an improvement from the current state of affairs?
Listen in to hear our hosts exploring the arguments while playing all types of devils’ advocates from “people will not be able to make informed decisions” to “this is about safeguarding users’ autonomy” and everything in between.
With this episode we’ll wrap up the year 2024 and wish all our 7 (+ Joost’s wife and dog = 9) listeners happy holidays and a Schrems III-free 2025!
LINKS: https://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/news/2024/edpb-consent-or-pay-models-should-offer-real-choice_en
Did you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us a coffee here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PodPrivacy, #privacypod
Instagram: @privacypod
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tietosuojapod/about/
Email: [email protected]
-
Gather around the fire, children, and listen closely: it is time once again to enjoy CJEU case law in the best possible way with Joost’s Case Corner! Yes, Jyri and Pilvi join forces again with the amazing Joost Gerritsen and dive right back into the CJEU Super Friday cases. In this episode, we will cover:
Case C-200/23, Agentsia po vpisvaniyata
(A Bulgarian case about whether an individual has the right to ask the agency to delete their personal data from the company registry, the scope of legal obligation as a legal basis, whether signatures are personal data, and if the official opinion of the Data Protection Authority can shield a controller from liabilities if the court disagrees with the DPA’s opinion.)
Case C-4/23, Mirin
(If a first name and sex/gender are changed in one member state, must other member states recognize it as well?)
Case C-768/21, Land Hessen
(Does the DPA have an obligation to exercise corrective power in all cases of data breaches, particularly to impose a fine, at the demand of the data subject?)As a bonus, we also cover the following cases:
C-169/23, Masdi
(A Hungarian case focusing on Article 14(5)(c): does the article exempt controllers from their obligation to inform data subjects when the data processing—obtaining or disclosure—derives from national law?)
C-80/23, Ministerstvo na vatreshnite raboti
(A Bulgarian case about the Law Enforcement Directive (LED) regarding the concept of “strict necessity” in the context of biometric and genetic data collection for creating police records.)
So lean back, close your eyes, reward yourself for making it to December of this eventful year, and let the velvety voice of Joost carry you to the wonderful wonderland of CJEU Case Law. Darling, we got you.
Did you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us coffee here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Instagram: @privacypod
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tietosuojapod/about/
Email: [email protected]
Links:
Case C-200/23, Agentsia po vpisvaniyata:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62023CN0200Case C-4/23, Mirin:
https://curia.europa.eu/juris/documents.jsf?num=C-4/23
Case C-768/21, Land Hessen:
https://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?lgrec=fr&td=%3BALL&language=en&num=C-768/21&jur=CC-169/23, Masdi:
https://gdprhub.eu/index.php?title=AG_-_C-169/23_-_M%C3%A1sdi -
Tired of keeping up with all the CJEU case law? Want to prepare yourself for all the cool discussions at the IAPP Brussels event? Not to worry! The Joost’s Case Corner covering the CJEU Super Friday cases has landed for you to enjoy. In the first of two of the Super Friday episodes, we will cover:
Case C-21/23 Lindenapotheke (What is Art 9 data and what’s not? Can companies rat out each other regarding compliance with the GDPR (and is it smart)?)
Case C-621/22 KNLT (Can a commercial interest constitute legitimate interest? We also get a brief history of this case and learn to understand the Dutch DPA a bit better and cover some hot tea on the subject.)
Case C-446/21 Schrems v Facebook (Can you process publicly disclosed information on sexual orientation for targeted advertising just because it is public information?)
We also learn about the most awesome Dutch legal term “breaking through the wall” and Olaus Petri (a priest who lived 1493-1552, in Swedish Olof Persson, who is still an important character in Finnish law) while discussing legal theory of EU law.
So take a good breath, let all the stress of November leave your mind, and enjoy the awesome drama that is CJEU case law!
Links:
Case C-21/23 Lindenapotheke
https://curia.europa.eu/juris/documents.jsf?num=C-21/23
Case C-621/22 KNLT
https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=290688&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=4086618
Case C-446/21 Schrems v Facebook
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62021CJ0446Did you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us a pumpkin spice latte here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PodPrivacy, #privacypod
Instagram: @privacypod
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tietosuojapod/about/
Email: [email protected]
-
Are you googling me? Stop googling me, Jyri!
In this episode Jyri, Pilvi, and Milla take a look at the latest interesting privacy news. The repertoire includes discussion on what happens when regulation is 20 years late (=personalized ads and privacy issues) in the form of LinkedIn’s 310 million euro fine and NOYB’s Pinterest complaint.
We also fall in love (and you will too) with Germany’s Traunstein Court and their Schrems II case (transfers to the US), where the court gave out a decision that seems to include some common sense (no joke). Do listen in for some statements that will first make you feel warm and fuzzy, smiling from ear to ear, and then break you in the “Don’t do that, Don’t give me hope.” -meme kind of way. But hey–when was the last time you felt warm and fuzzy about a Schrems II decision? We thought so too. We all need this, we’ve been through a lot.
We also rant about the latest “know your sub-processors to the infinity and beyond” EDPB guideline draft and most importantly, Jyri tells you in detail how you can actually get some suggestions implemented in the public consultation rounds (no joke).
So grab your Halloween-candy-flavored-popcorn and enjoy some privacy goodie-goodie! You deserve it and darling, we got you.
Did you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us a pumpkin spice latte here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, send us your Pinterest boards, or send us traditional email:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PodPrivacy, #privacypod
Instagram: @privacypod
-
In this episode, amazing hosts Milla Keller and Floora Kukorelli sit down with Jussi Mäkinen to discuss the (bright?) future of EU technology regulation. Jussi Mäkinen leads the EU regulatory team at the Federation of Finnish Technology Industries and has extensive experience in digital regulation, both in drafting policies and advocating for industry interests.
The discussion revolves around the so-called Draghi Report, in which the former European Central Bank President and Prime Minister of Italy Mario Draghi warns that the EU is falling behind the US and China in the use of data and digital services. The report suggests that Europe’s declining competitiveness is partly due to its stringent data (protection) regulations. The conversation explores whether the Draghi Report marks a turning point in EU data protection policies and what it might mean for the future.
The episode also looks at the role of the incoming European Commission in shaping future technology regulations, with special attention to Commissioner Henna Virkkunen from Finland, who oversees areas like technology and competitiveness. The discussion examines her approach and the potential impact it could have on EU tech regulation.
Additionally, the episode delves into the future of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the fate of the ePrivacy Regulation. Our guest believes that a more practical approach to privacy is needed moving forward, with the EU striking a better balance between protecting privacy and fostering innovation - the million dollar question is, where this balance lies.
This episode provides an engaging and timely look at the current state and future prospects of EU technology regulation for anyone interested in the digital economy and EU policymaking.
Did you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us a coffee here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PodPrivacy, #privacypod
Instagram: @privacypod
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tietosuojapod/about/
Email: [email protected]
-
Get ready for a super META conversation—no, not about social media, but about who we are and what we really do. Milla and Laura are joined by the privacy guru herself, Natalija Bitiukova (Head of Privacy at Carlsberg). They almost spent the entire episode talking about beer, but once they tapped into Natalija’s epic level of privacy geekdom, the focus shifted back to our roles in the privacy world.
Stick around until the end, and you’ll be treated to the story of the most romantic gift in the universe (hint: “the world” just doesn’t cut it).
There’s a lot to unpack in today’s chat, so take notes—what you agree with, disagree with, or just find hilariously nerdy—and we’ll do a future episode where we read your comments and dive deeper. Grab your earbuds and let’s get META!
LINKS:
Natalija’s hobby: https://streamlex.eu/
EDPB survey on DPO: https://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/news/2024/edpb-identifies-areas-improvement-promote-role-and-recognition-dpos_en
Did you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us a coffee here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PodPrivacy, #privacypod
Instagram: @privacypod
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tietosuojapod/about/
Email: [email protected]
-
The world of privacy and AI shook and trembled when Hamburg's Data Protection Authority published its edgy discussion paper on Large Language Models (LLM). In a nutshell, they stated that LLMs do not store personal data and that this is in line with the CJEU’s views. Milla and Pilvi were honored and humbled (=overly excited with fangirl-hats on) to have Dr. Markus Wünschelbaum, Policy and Data Strategy Advisor at the Hamburg Data Protection Authority, to discuss what’s this all about. And what a discussion this ended up being!
Markus takes our (and your) hands and walks us all through the discussion paper’s key points and how the DPA ended up with this view: From the technical key points (it’s all about probabilities) all the way to the legal gymnastics and philosophy. On the other hand we also discuss what the result and impact would be if we would take the stance that LLMs do in fact store personal data and if that would actually make any sense. And what about NOYB’s complaint on OpenAI?
All this and much, much more awaits all our 6 listeners in this episode that you should not miss. After the recording our hosts needed a moment to gather themselves from all the excitement. We tried to be tough journalists but how can you not get excited about all this. We love DPAs with edgy action and hot tea to serve. Sorry about that. BUT IT WAS TOO FUN!
Did you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us a coffee here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PodPrivacy, #privacypod
Instagram: @privacypod
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tietosuojapod/about/
Email: [email protected]
Links:
In German:
https://datenschutz-hamburg.de/news/hamburger-thesen-zum-personenbezug-in-large-language-models
In English:
https://datenschutz-hamburg.de/fileadmin/user_upload/HmbBfDI/Datenschutz/Informationen/240715_Discussion_Paper_Hamburg_DPA_KI_Models.pdf
-
In this episode, Jyri, Milla, and Pilvi walk you through the latest hottest tea in privacy and data protection. First, we turn our attention to the herald of doom itself: Clearview and the actions taken by the Dutch Data Protection Authority (fine of 30,5 million euros and then some). Will the Dutch DPA follow through with going after the management and inflict personal liability the managers or directors of Cleaview?
We also explore whether such a grim herald can have any positive aspects. The Dutch DPA suggests that the government could create its own version of Clearview, raising an important question. Should we, as a human society, pursue every technological capability simply because we can?
Next, we visit the herald of digital future and all things beautiful, that is of course Sweden. The Swedish data protection authority, IMY, has given out two fines for unfortunate use of Meta pixels by a pharmacy and a bank that led to leaking sensitive personal data to Meta. The cases have some meme aspects (legal said no) but also raise up important questions: what is the root cause? Could Meta’s way of enrolling in updates be the one to blame? What steps to take to ensure your organization’s compliance?
Then, we take a look at the latest blog by Anu Talus, the Finnish Data Protection Ombudsman and the the Chair of the European Data Protection Board. She admires Sweden (don’t we all?), who seems to thrive under the GDPR rules whereas Finland’s Data Protection Authority remains under-resourced, raising concerns about its ability to support future demands. She distinctly calls out for the ability to fine the public sector also in Finland (one of the few countries where this isnt possible), and discusses the AI Act.
Lastly, we dive into a fast-paced Lightning Round™ of key data protection developments. From the Belgian DPA’s crackdown on dark patterns in cookie consent to fines against Uniqlo by the Spanish DPA (AEPD), and a penalty for Vejen Municipality in Denmark over stolen school laptops, important actions are shaping the landscape. We also explore Liechtenstein’s insights on remote work and
This and much more (such as some tips on who to follow on LinkedIn) awaits behind the play-button!
Did you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us a coffee here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PodPrivacy, #privacypod
Instagram: @privacypod
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tietosuojapod/about/
Email: [email protected]
Links:
Clearview fine:
https://www.autoriteitpersoonsgegevens.nl/en/current/dutch-dpa-imposes-a-fine-on-clearview-because-of-illegal-data-collection-for-facial-recognitionSwedish Meta Pixel cases:
https://www.imy.se/nyheter/sanktionsavgift-mot-avanza-for-overforing-av-personuppgifter-till-meta/
https://www.imy.se/nyheter/sanktionsavgifter-mot-apoteket-och-apohem-for-overforing-av-personuppgifter-till-meta/Anu Talus’ blog:
https://tietosuoja.fi/-/tekoaly-hoi-missa-suomen-digistrategia-Belgian DPA’s cookie case:
https://www.gegevensbeschermingsautoriteit.be/publications/beslissing-ten-gronde-nr.-113-2024-van-6-september-2024.pdfUniqlo fine:
https://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/national-news/2024/spanish-supervisory-authority-fined-uniqlo-europe-ltd-violations-article_enVejen Municipality fine:
https://www.datatilsynet.dk/afgoerelser/afgoerelser/2024/aug/endnu-en-kommune-indstillet-til-boede-for-manglende-krypteringThe DPA of Lichtenstein’s activity report for 2023:
https://www.datenschutzstelle.li/application/files/3417/2526/0394/WEB_Datenschutzstelle_Taetigkeitsbericht_2023.pdf -
See how we get back to podcasting after the brat summer? Very demure, very mindful. We are not like these other podcasts, we don’t come back for the new season with a half-planned episode, we don’t use chatGPT to make notes, we don’t record too long episodes where half of it is just giggling–we’re very mindful, very considerate, very cutesy.
In today’s very considerate episode Jyri, Milla, and Pilvi walk you through the most interesting news from the summer, such as the mega fine of €13,9 million given by the the Czech Supervisory Authority to a cyber security company that shared data of 100 million data subjects to its subsidiaries in a not very mindful way. We also discuss the latest drama on the EU Commission’s Preliminary DMA Findings on Pay or Consent as well as Meta suing the EDPB that is very interesting, very cutesy.
We also take a look at the secret collaboration between Meta and Google to target ads at 13–17-year-olds and have a discussion on what’s the harm in this? Is it really a problem or are we just trying to hold on to a world that is not realistic? We are not like these other privacy people–we don’t just gush about this–we explore different perspectives and play devil’s advocate. Very mindful, very considerate, very demure.
These and much more in this episode where we do not try to play too much slightly off pitch on the hottest meme by the amazing @joolieannie , we’re very considerate, very funny, very cutesy, very mindful, and most certainly very demure.
Did you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us a coffee here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PodPrivacy, #privacypod
Instagram: @privacypod
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tietosuojapod/about/
Email: [email protected]
Links:
Big fine in Czech:
https://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/news/2024/czech-sa-imposed-fine-139-million-eur-infringement-art-6-and-art-13-gdpr_en
EU Commission and Pay or Consent:
Commission sends preliminary findings to Meta over its “Pay or Consent” model for breach of the Digital Markets Act - European Commission (europa.eu)
Meta and Google not very demure collaboration:
https://www.ft.com/content/b3bb80f4-4e01-4ce6-8358-f4f8638790f8
NOYB annual report
Annual_Report_2023_EN.pdf (noyb.eu)
Scraping and OpenAI:
Microsoft Word - 2024.08.02 FINAL OpenAI Complaint (2) (courtlistener.com)
https://www.legaldive.com/news/nvidia-open-ai-face-youtube-creator-lawsuits-for-using-online-videos/724498/ -
Prepare to get your mind blown (and not necessarily in a good way) - in this episode Laura, Floora, Pilvi, Milla and Hannes (what a full house!) discuss the theory and practice behind data processing roles.
What is the background of the roles, what is working and not working - why does CJEU want everyone to be joint controllers, what about the AI Act and much more.
If you bear with us to the very end we even throw in some suggestions on how to develop a less complex life for the many privacy professionals.
linkit:
EDPB guideline on controller and processor:
https://www.edpb.europa.eu/our-work-tools/our-documents/guidelines/guidelines-072020-concepts-controller-and-processor-gdpr_en
CJEU, judgment of July 10, 2018, Jehovan todistajat, C‑25/17, EU:C:2018:55 https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=203822&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=1305431
CJEU; judgment of June 5, 2018, Wirtschaftsakademie Schleswig-Holstein, C‑210/16, EU:C:2018:388 https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=202543&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=1305548
CJEU, judgment of July 29, 2019, Fashion ID, C‑40/17, EU:C:2019:629 https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=216555&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=1305826
Did you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us a coffee here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PodPrivacy, #privacypod
Instagram: @privacypod
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tietosuojapod/about/
-
Cambridge Analytica, Brexit, Trump, Russian Trolls. Political microtargeting has shaped the world and our society more and longer than we would like to admit. The European Union decided to fight back on it with Regulation on the transparency and targeting of political advertising, yet the road to the regulation was everything but smooth. Time will tell how or if the regulation will be able to actually make a difference.
On this episode, Milla and Pilvi are going back to this important subject with our very special guest, privacy influencer and an Estonian lawyer Norman Aasma, who wrote his master thesis on the subject. Together we will discuss the road to the regulation, what was the issue with banning the use of sensitive personal data, what does the regulation actually regulate, and what change we can expect it to make.
The episode was recorded on the 27th of May 2024, just before the EU Elections, and thus, we also discuss the current EU Elections and take a brief look at the political advertising taking place (or the lack of it…). We compare it to the research data and results that we have gained from conducting research on the Finnish elections (see our Finnish podcast TietosuojaPod episodes #66 and #52).
So hit play and join us to enjoy a moment in privacy!
Did you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us a coffee here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PodPrivacy, #privacypod
Instagram: @privacypod
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tietosuojapod/about/
Email: [email protected]
-
“Welcome! Welcome! Welcome! To PrivacyPod Joost’s Case Corner Episode, we are your hosts Milla and Pilvi with Joost Kle… Gerritsen. Thank you so much for joining us and let us begin with our first and most important story, the events of last week’s Eurovision and the big denim egg that made it all the way to “Last Week Tonight” with John Oliver (Go Finland!).”
After we have gathered ourselves from the too short (Panu’s comment which has been noted) section on Eurovision, we move head first to the most interesting recent CJEU cases! And what is on the chopping block today?
CJEU NADA and Others [C-115/22], where doping results were published online.
CJEU Juris [C-741/21], where a lawyer wanted to be compensated on receiving direct marketing which for some reason made some of our hosts just lose it (sorry).
CJEU IAB Europe [C-604/22], where our focus is on the joint controllership aspect of the case.
Thank you so much for listening and good night!
Links:
Belgian DPA’s Decision on IAB Europe:
decision-quant-au-fond-n-21-2022-en.pdf (autoriteprotectiondonnees.be)
CJEU NADA and Others [C-115/22]:
https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=285723&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=2737812
CJEU Juris [C-741/21]:
https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=284641&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=2738131
CJEU IAB Europe [C-604/22]:
https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=283529&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=2738315
Did you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us a coffee here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PodPrivacy, #privacypod
Instagram: @privacypod
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tietosuojapod/about/
Email: [email protected]
-
We’re so glad to geek out on something a bit different this week, as we welcome Natallia Karniyevich to discuss all things cyber with our hosts Hannes Saarinen and Milla Keller. Natallia is a senior associate at Bird & Bird, where she also co-chairs Bird & Bird’s international cybersecurity steering group.
Natallia guides us through what has been a flood of new, stricter cybersecurity legislation. We discuss the background and need behind the new laws. We look a bit closer specifically at the NIS2 Directive, which brings tighter requirements to many different kinds of organizations. And ofcourse, we discuss what do these new laws mean for privacy professionals: how does cyber intersect with the GDPR?
Did you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us a coffee here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PodPrivacy, #privacypod
Instagram: @privacypod
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tietosuojapod/about/
Email: [email protected]
-
We have good news and bad news. Good news are, we are returning with Joost’s Case Corner, so expect lots of CJEU goodness from this episode. Bad news are, we get pretty distracted by other (equally important) topics before actually getting to the CJEU privacy cases… But don’t worry, whatever recent case law we didn’t cover in this episode, we’ll come back to in another episode in a few weeks!
Ok, so what do we discuss in this episode? We had to start with EDPB’s Pay or Consent Opinion, as that is the most exciting piece of news from last week. Related to that, we also dare to talk about the Advocate General’s Opinion in the C-446/21 Schrems v Facebook case - even though the AG Opinion was only published after we recorded the episode.
The CJEU cases we cover in this episode are:
CJEU Belgian State – Data processed by an official journal [C-231/22]
CJEU Gesamtverband Autoteile-Handel [C-319/22]
CJEU FT – Copies of medical records [C-307/22]
CJEU Ministerstvo zdravotnictví – COVID-19 mobile application [C-659/22]
(Upcoming on 7 May 2024) - CJEU NADA and Others [C-115/22]
Did you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us a coffee here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PodPrivacy, #privacypod
Instagram: @privacypod
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tietosuojapod/about/
Email: [email protected]
-
Laura and Panu are joined by Otto Lindholm to discuss recent CJEU case related to Finnish transparency laws and disclosing criminal conviction data via telephone. What is the Finnish tradition of transparency of official documents really about, are we now losing it and what’s going to happen?
If you ask Panu, doomsday is upon us. Transparency is dead and criminals, politicians and reality tv contestants will run amok with no accountability. Or then its just a storm in a tea cup. Panu does make a lot of mistakes, such as reads the European Charter of Fundamental Rights wrongly.
In other news, but no less important, the Court actually states that oral transfer of data from a filing system is processing of personal data. Did you see that one coming? The cool privacy kids did, Panu did not. The discussion twists and turns and reaches some kafkaesque levels but who cares - privacy theory is fun.
Hope you enjoyed our show? Support us by buying us a coffee here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PodPrivacy, #privacypod
Instagram: @privacypod
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tietosuojapod/about/
Email: [email protected]
-
It’s been a heavy spring. So many new things are coming to privacy folk’s way, the world is (literally) shaking, we are killing our one planet, old men are driving the world to turmoil and horror. The world is getting darker.
Therefore, without forgetting the importance of discussing all the difficult things, we decided to treat you with an invitation to Milla’s happy place: to discuss something that is full of bright colors and makes everyone focus, just for a brief moment, on the importance of coming together and enjoying the beautiful wonders that people do. We are of course talking about the Eurovision!
Will ABBA serve a beautiful Swedish Suprise in May in Malmö? Which year did TIX compete for Norway (Milla gets this wrong)? What country did Flo Rida compete for? And whats the most efficient way to collect consent? One of these questions is not answered in this episode.
Even though the task was to talk a little bit about Eurovision and a lot about privacy, Pilvi kinda ends up interviewing Milla about her love for the Eurovision and all the wonderful twists and turns this performance art competition includes. We also asked the presenters to take few breaks for editing purposes, but guess that was too much to ask. And anyway we maybe did or didn’t have time to cover privacy-related news - one has to prioritize.
So put on your headphones, grab a glass of your favorite beverage, and slide into the bliss of Eurovision for a moment – it’s on us!
And Herkko, you can skip this episode!
Did you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us a coffee here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PodPrivacy, #privacypod
Instagram: @privacypod
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tietosuojapod/about/
Email: [email protected]
-
Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend us your ears!
We’ve come to discuss if transparency matters, not to bury it.
The insufficient privacy decisions that men do lives after them;
The efforts for better privacy is oft interred with their business minded decisions;
So let it be with transparency. The noble controllers
hath told you GDPR is impossibly ambitious:
if it were so, it was a grievous fault,
And grievously hath DPAs enforced it.
Here, under leave of our Executive Producer and the rest-
For he is an honorable man;
so are we all, all honorable people–
come we to battle this out for once and for all.
And battle we shall. It is no secret that the PrivacyPod back-chat is often turned into a gladiator arena where we battle our views to the very end. One of the most discussed subject is if transparency even matters and what is the point of it. This time, Floora has set up the challenge and armed our gladiators Milla and Pilvi with gladius swords and retes nets, and lets them lose on the arena.
Who barricades themselves on a hill of business minded decisions? Does better transparency create more risks or will it reduce risks? Is transparency a zero-sum game? Who tries to take a victory lap on a high horse only to be knocked down? Who has the high ground? Who tries to win all Partners to their side with icky frases? Will our friendship survive this or will this be the end of PrivacyPod?
So grab some popcorn and join in for a Shakespeare level drama!
Links:
Klarna case:
https://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/national-news/2022/swedish-authority-privacy-protection-imy-issues-administrative-fine-against_enhttps://www.imy.se/en/news/administrative-fine-against-klarna-after-investigation/
Whatsapp case:
https://www.dataprotection.ie/en/news-media/press-releases/data-protection-commission-announces-decision-whatsapp-inquiry
Shakespeare: Julius Caesar, Act III, scene II:
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/56968/speech-friends-romans-countrymen-lend-me-your-ears
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q89MLuLSJgk
Did you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us a coffee here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PodPrivacy, #privacypod
Instagram: @privacypod
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tietosuojapod/about/
Email: [email protected]
-
It’s about time you fell in love with something that will love you back, and that, our friends, is the crossroad of privacy, government openness, and freedom of speech. It doesn’t judge you, and we won’t either.
The European Court of Justice, however, will totally judge you, even if it goes against deep roots or local law in your country. In this episode, Pilvi and Jyri will discuss the new (Finnish!) European Court of Justice case “Endemol Shine”. Here a Finnish district court had denied the release of court documents due to GDPR to a producer conducting background checks for reality TV, despite local statutes on openness of court documents. We continue on the same path with discussing NOYB filing a complaint on MrKoll in Sweden, which touches upon the Nordic unwillingness to judge and define what journalism and media is. We end up wondering if GDPR is obliterating Nordic cultures and what consequences this may have.
On other news, the USA will totally judge you as well if you are TikTok or happen to be from Singapore. We discuss the “The US TikTok Ban” as an interesting reaction to possible cross-border data transfers to a country that might use that personal data for intelligence activities… sounds vaguely familiar.
We also discuss the Verkkokauppa.com case where the Finnish DPA decided on a record fine of 856 000 euros for not having defined retention times for online customers’ customer account data as well as forcing all online customers to create an account.
This episode will also include the first ever musical number of PrivacyPod.
So push play, hop on to this love boat, and we´ll take good care of you.
(Ps. If you missed it, the EU Parliament accepted the AI Act.)
Links:
Endemol Shine
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:62022CN0740NOYB and MrKoll:
https://noyb.eu/en/swedish-data-brokers-claim-journalists-legal-protection-evade-eu-law
How to get a media license in Sweden:
https://mediemyndigheten.se/ansokan-och-registrering/medier-pa-natet/
H.R.7521 - Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7521?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%22TikTok%22%7D&s=1&r=5
Case Verkkokauppa.com (In Finnish, translatable):
https://tietosuoja.fi/-/verkkokauppa.comille-seuraamusmaksu-asiakastietojen-sailytysajan-maarittelematta-jattamisesta-myos-vaatimus-asiakkaan-rekisteroitymisesta-oli-lainvastainenDid you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us a coffee here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PodPrivacy, #privacypod
Instagram: @privacypod
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tietosuojapod/about/
Email: [email protected]
- Näytä enemmän
