The week of 5th December proved to be a great week for starting an IT Law updates blog. I do hope this is a *sign* that I have the nose for smelling out the freshest news, and that I have a sort of blogger’s luck that will not die out after the beginner’s stage. I should also probably take this opportunity to thank *spoiler alert* the EU especially for providing enough IT Law updates to fill up an entire blog post. Without further ado, I present to you the very first 🫐 Berry Picks in IT Law (pun sort of intended, just a little).
So, what’s the tea this week? ☕️
🔏 Data Protection and Privacy
WhatsApp-EU Law saga continues: the General Court found inadmissible the action brought by WhatsApp against the decision of the European Data Protection Board adopted on 28th July 2021. The EDPB decision had found WhatsApp to be non-compliant with its obligations on mandatory information to be provided to data subjects. Although, EU Law basics seem to be overshadowed by the exciting topic. The decision of the General Court is based on the view that the Court does not have jurisdiction to review the legality of the act in the present case. This is because WhatsApp is not directly concerned by the contested decision. However, the EDPB decision is still open to contest before national courts, if applied at national level.
It was a big week for Meta. The EDPB adopted a binding decision concerning Meta. It was settled, among others, whether the processing of personal data for the performance of a contract is a suitable legal basis for behavioural advertising (see Facebook and Instagram), and for service improvement (see WhatsApp). Although the decision is yet to be published, the Wall Street Journal reports that the decision will mean personalised ads can no longer be forced on users with terms of services. Thereby, Meta will either need to seek consent from users or offer them an opt-out. I feel like we *all felt this to be the obvious, yet hard to implement consequence of the GDPR.
The CJEU provided for a clear understanding for the right to be forgotten. The Court ruled a search engine operator must delist information given the person requesting proves that such information is manifestly inaccurate. This proof need not result from a judicial decision. We were all wishing for someone to finally state the obvious, right?
🛒 Digital Consumer
The news all EU tech-geeks will have been waiting for, it’s time. 7th December saw the Directive 2022/2380 relating to common chargers for mobile devices, which will enter into force on 27th December, published in the Official Journal of the EU. The Directive, in a nutshell, calls for uniformity in wired chargers, and I am here for it. For more information on the Directive, here is the latest 🍓 berry blog post.
A new step towards consumer protection on the machines was taken. The UK government published a voluntary Code of Practice for app developers and operators to better protect consumers from malicious and poorly developed apps, released as the “World-first Code of Practice to strengthen consumer protections across the app market”. The Code will require app store operators and developers to make the apps smooth for consumers, especially in terms of security, privacy, efficiency and updates.
🤖 Artificial Intelligence
Artificial intelligence and the protection of fundamental rights enthusiasts will be pleased to know- The European Union Agency for Fundamental Right (“FRA”) published its new report titled “Bias in algorithms – Artificial intelligence and discrimination“. The report demonstrates how bias in algorithms appears, can amplify over time and affect people’s lives, potentially leading to discrimination. It corroborates the need for more comprehensive and thorough assessments of algorithms in terms of bias before such algorithms are used for decision-making that can have an impact on people.
The FRA published 6 main opinions, all of which contain the basic idea: may all shareholders (this is you users of systems, legislators, Member States) please please please assess your data, sources, and ensure that algorithms are unbiased and sensitive to fundamental rights.
👾 Blockchain & Crypto Assets
To invest or not to invest, is obviously for someone else to comment on when it comes to crypto assets. In terms of regulation, though, there is a new proposed sheriff in town. The European Commission proposed new tax transparency rules for all service providers facilitating transactions in crypto assets for customers residing in the EU. The rules would complement the proposed MiCA Regulation and anti-money laundering rules. The proposal is aimed to improve Member States’ ability to detect and counter tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance. It will be requiring all crypto-asset service providers to report transactions of clients residing in the EU. The Directive also aims to establish a common minimum level of penalties for situations of serious non-compliance, such as the complete absence of reporting despite administrative reminders.
4 thoughts to “Berry Picks in IT Law #1”