Sentences with phrase «personal data protection rules»

The Commission alleges the UK failed to comply with EU e-privacy and personal data protection rules by allowing Phorm to track internet users» web - surfing patterns to determine their interests and then deliver targeted advertising, without customers» consent.

Not exact matches

GDPR will codify data protection rules for all companies that collect data from EU citizens while greatly expanding individuals» control over how and when their personal data is collected and used.

This includes the impending installment of Data Protection Officers for all enterprises that possess «special categories» of data, including health data, to ensure that personal information is processed in compliance with the applicable data protection ruData Protection Officers for all enterprises that possess «special categories» of data, including health data, to ensure that personal information is processed in compliance with the applicable data protectProtection Officers for all enterprises that possess «special categories» of data, including health data, to ensure that personal information is processed in compliance with the applicable data protection rudata, including health data, to ensure that personal information is processed in compliance with the applicable data protection rudata, to ensure that personal information is processed in compliance with the applicable data protection rudata protectionprotection rules.

It suggested the proposed bill ignores the European court ruling that blanket data retention breaches fundamental rights to respect for private life and the protection of personal data.

The European Parliament has approved stricter rules for the protection of personal data across the European Union, dealing a blow to research organizations that said the changes would undermine public health and medical research.

It would therefore appear that while regulators recognise that companies such as Google must have scope to monetise their services using personal data, in so doing the fundamentals of national data protection rules must be respected.

The Article 29 Working Party is demanding that its data protection rules apply to personal data processed by companies that do not even have EU offices.

Furthermore, when ruling on the second condition of Article 8 Regulation 45/2001 whereby EU institutions have a duty to verify that data subjects» legitimate interests may not be harmed by the transfer, the Court found that the personal data at issue fell into the public sphere of MEPs and as such required a lesser degree of protection.

Consider whether any data classified as personal under national interpretations of the EU Data Protection Directive 95 / 46 / EC is likely to be involved — an estimation of the types and character of the data (whether it falls within the scope of EU data protection rules as it relates to an «identifiable person»; whether the data concerned is «sensitive data&raqdata classified as personal under national interpretations of the EU Data Protection Directive 95 / 46 / EC is likely to be involved — an estimation of the types and character of the data (whether it falls within the scope of EU data protection rules as it relates to an «identifiable person»; whether the data concerned is «sensitive data&raqData Protection Directive 95 / 46 / EC is likely to be involved — an estimation of the types and character of the data (whether it falls within the scope of EU data protection rules as it relates to an «identifiable person»; whether the data concerned is «sensitive daProtection Directive 95 / 46 / EC is likely to be involved — an estimation of the types and character of the data (whether it falls within the scope of EU data protection rules as it relates to an «identifiable person»; whether the data concerned is «sensitive data&raqdata (whether it falls within the scope of EU data protection rules as it relates to an «identifiable person»; whether the data concerned is «sensitive data&raqdata protection rules as it relates to an «identifiable person»; whether the data concerned is «sensitive daprotection rules as it relates to an «identifiable person»; whether the data concerned is «sensitive data&raqdata concerned is «sensitive data&raqdata»)

The Canadian cloud has been seen as one of the most attractive data destinations: national privacy policies and provincial rules and regulations in this country provide good protections for an individual's personal information, as well as important data held or used by public institutions such as schools, universities, hospitals, government - owned utilities and government - operated service providers.

«When it comes to non-digital marketing, data protection rules still require that anyone processing personal data must have a «legitimate interest» for doing so.

FIA 2000 also provides that where the information requested is personal data about an individual other than the requester that the personal data should not be released if the release would involve a breach of data protection rules.

Likewise, the Court observes that legislation not providing for any possibility for an individual to pursue legal remedies in order to have access to personal data relating to him, or to obtain the rectification or erasure of such data, compromises the essence of the fundamental right to effective judicial protection, the existence of such a possibility being inherent in the existence of the rule of law.

Whilst the Court of Justice alone has jurisdiction to declare an EU act invalid, where a claim is lodged with the national supervisory authorities they may, even where the Commission has adopted a decision finding that a third country affords an adequate level of protection of personal data, examine whether the transfer of a person's data to the third country complies with the requirements of the EU legislation on the protection of that data and, in the same way as the person concerned, bring the matter before the national courts, in order that the national courts make a reference for a preliminary ruling for the purpose of examination of that decision's validity

Q5 oddly implies that what you might do with data defines whether the data is «personal data», which is confusing, but amounts to saying «even if this is in the ordinary sense «personal data», it is not subject to the protection requirements» — this is not uncommon in law, where rules are stated in terms of a label («personal data»), and the rules are very simple, but the definition of the label can be complicated.

There are also specific rules for the protection of personal data in police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (Framework Decision 2008 / 977 / JHA).

Jourova said that an extant challenge against so - called standard contractual clauses (SCCs)-- which are used by the likes of Facebook (and many other companies) to transfer personal data between their EU and US businesses, and which earlier this month the Irish High said it would refer to Europe's top court for a preliminary ruling — is relevant to Privacy Shield because it could also have implications for the latter's future viability (i.e. if the ECJ decides SCCs do not in fact offer adequate protection for citizens» data).

The General Data Protection Regulation is a rule passed by the European Union in 2016, setting new rules for how companies manage and share personal dData Protection Regulation is a rule passed by the European Union in 2016, setting new rules for how companies manage and share personal datadata.

The incoming data protection rules apply to both data controllers (i.e. entities that determine the purpose and means of processing personal data) and data processors (entities that are responsible for processing data on behalf of a data controller — aka subcontractors).

In addition to increasing consumer awareness, the European Union parliament recently adopted the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which gives consumers more control over their personal data, requires greater transparency of corporate data sharing, and penalizes companies that fail to comply with the new ruData Protection Regulation (GDPR), which gives consumers more control over their personal data, requires greater transparency of corporate data sharing, and penalizes companies that fail to comply with the new rudata, requires greater transparency of corporate data sharing, and penalizes companies that fail to comply with the new rudata sharing, and penalizes companies that fail to comply with the new rules.

But seen through the prism of stricter incoming EU data protection rules, under the new GDPR regime which comes into force next May, there are certainly serious financial considerations for Facebook's business pertaining to privacy — as the new EU regime includes a far larger stick to beat companies that are judged to have violated data protection rules while also tightening up privacy rules by, for example, expanding the definition of personal data and giving EU citizens the right to ask for their data to be deleted.

The law, known as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), is said to be the largest overhaul of personal data privacy rules since the birth of the interData Protection Regulation (GDPR), is said to be the largest overhaul of personal data privacy rules since the birth of the interdata privacy rules since the birth of the internet.