nemobis, (edited ) to random
@nemobis@mamot.fr avatar

Ennesima sconfitta per alla : "La normativa italiana che esclude dalla gestione dei diritti d'autore le società indipendenti stabilite in un altro Stato membro è incompatibile con il diritto
dell'Unione".
https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2024-03/cp240052it.pdf
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/it/TXT/?uri=CELEX:62022CJ0010

Grazie ! Peccato che siano rimasti solo i tribunali a difendere l'interesse generale nel campo del .

remixtures, to Bulgaria Portuguese
@remixtures@tldr.nettime.org avatar

: "In a landmark decision on 7 March 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued a groundbreaking judgment against online targeted ads prohibited by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). This ruling has far-reaching implications for major platforms, including giants like Google and TikTok, that rely on the online personalised advertising industry as part of their business model. The Court recognised that invasive tracking and profiling cannot be sanctioned through ‘consent’ pop-ups, responding to a complaint that focused on the mechanisms facilitating the covert profiling and monitoring of the private activities of a majority of individuals across the digital realm. The court’s decision emphasised the need for stricter controls on the online tracking and advertising industry." https://edri.org/our-work/europes-highest-court-delivers-landmark-judgment-against-iab-europe-in-gdpr-consent-spam-pop-ups-case/

noybeu, to random
@noybeu@mastodon.social avatar

39 Members of the European Parliament call on Meta to stop "pay or okay" and comply with the . They say "privacy may not become a luxury"! 💸💸💸

At the moment this is also before the EDPB and will probably end up at the !

👉 https://www.patrick-breyer.de/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/MEPs-Letter-to-Meta-on-Pay-or-Okay.pdf

nemobis, to Bulgaria
@nemobis@mamot.fr avatar

:

«a harmonised standard, adopted on the basis of a directive [...] forms part of EU law»

«the rule of law, which requires free access to EU law for all natural or legal persons of the European Union»

«there is an overriding public interest [...] justifying the disclosure of the requested harmonised standards»

«As is apparent [...] the Commission should have acknowledged [...] the existence of an overriding public interest»

https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?docid=283443&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=6375509

brekke, to Law Norwegian
@brekke@eupolicy.social avatar

If the Court of Justice of the European Union is, as is often argued, the most powerful international court the world has seen, why is serious resistance against it not more commonplace?

This is the question I ask in my PhD thesis, which I successfully defended at the last Friday. Today it has been made available open access through the university repository!

https://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/76659

@politicalscience @law

carlmalamud, to random
@carlmalamud@official.resource.org avatar

Big week next week. Tuesday, EU court of justice livestream. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/european-court-of-justice_ecjhighlights-weapons-eu-activity-7169264504210472961-wrKh/ The court listed us on their linked-in post as one of the top three things they might do that day. The name of the venue is "the Grand Chamber." 9:30am Luxembourg. Drum roll ....

nemobis,
@nemobis@mamot.fr avatar
nemobis, (edited ) to random
@nemobis@mamot.fr avatar

On 2024-03-05 the #CJEU will rule whether law-like standards are subject to #copyright (C-588/21 brought by PRO/ @carlmalamud on CEN HTS).
https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2023-06/cp230110en.pdf

In case of a victory for the #PublicDomain, how to celebrate?

I just realised that night I'll be in a crowded theatre, so maybe I can cry: "EN 2:1992/A1:2004 Classification of fires"? (Or just distribute a few copies.)

eric, to ai
@eric@social.coop avatar

Rating agencies may still freely automatically "score" individuals if it does not provide critical decision-making support.

Takeaways from the CJEU's recent rulings on automated decision-making: https://iapp.org/news/a/key-takeaways-from-the-cjeus-recent-automated-decision-making-rulings/ @ai

Gargron, to random
@Gargron@mastodon.social avatar

My wife is looking forward to deleting her Instagram account once she can connect with the same folks from her Mastodon account. Being able to remain in touch with over 100M people who still use Meta products out of the comfort of an ad-free, privacy-friendly platform like Mastodon is a game changer.

HistoPol, (edited )
@HistoPol@mastodon.social avatar

@Gargron @nileane @theLUCASTDS

(2/2)

...at that moment. Huge communities (e. g. +) came here not to be harassed by MAGATs et al.
Changing the fine print might not work either, as this constitutes a major change and could be considered an invalid surprise clause in many countries.

Erring on the wrong side of () might prove costly when decided upon by the some years in the future.

I'd say opting for as an instance might be a considerable business risk.
//

gnemmi, to privacy
@gnemmi@mastodon.sdf.org avatar

The (CJEU) today issued two landmark judgments in proceedings against the German credit reference agency SCHUFA, which previously enjoyed considerable freedom in Germany. The confirmed that national courts have extensive powers to scrutinize data protection authorities, strengthening the rights of data subjects. Furthermore, the court ruled that the assignment of automatically calculated credit scores is not in line with the

https://noyb.eu/en/cjeu-landmark-rulings-credit-ranking-and-review-dpas

mikarv, to random
@mikarv@someone.elses.computer avatar

@Curia ruling on multi-stage profiling

EDPS, to privacy
@EDPS@social.network.europa.eu avatar

⚖️Afternoon session of the 53rd EDPS-DPO meeting - Thomas Zerdick, leading the Supervision and Enforcement Unit, shares insightful updates on the latest developments in and case law. Stay informed on key legal trends shaping our digital rights.

TheEuropeanNetwork, (edited ) to Bulgaria

Government offices across the EU can ban employees from wearing religious symbols in the interest of neutrality, the EU’s top court has ruled, though it stressed that such restrictions must be applied equally to all employees and fit within the legal context of each member state.

The court of justice of the European Union said such bans were permissible in order to enforce an “entirely neutral administrative environment”.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/29/government-offices-in-eu-can-ban-wearing-of-religious-symbols-court-rules

DetersHenning, to Bulgaria German
@DetersHenning@eupolicy.social avatar

Any historians around? Since when can member states not party to a direct action proceeding before the submit observations? The oldest example I could find by a crude text search dates from 1986 [1]. That's 32 years after the first direct action was lodged that included a member state [2]. Were member states simply not allowed to submit observations before?

@politicalscience @law

EDPS, to random
@EDPS@social.network.europa.eu avatar

⚖️ Today, and @Curia shed light on the EDPS Decision of July 13, 2023, concerning the use of Cisco Webex by the Court of Justice — an important step toward compliance! 🏛️💻 https://europa.eu/!VbKXCW

remixtures, to Bulgaria Portuguese
@remixtures@tldr.nettime.org avatar

: A"RTICLE 19 is disappointed by today’s judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in a case concerning public access to documents about a controversial European Union-funded emotion recognition project to be deployed at borders. The EU Research Executive Agency (REA) denied access to numerous documents related to the project, citing the protection of the commercial interest. In Breyer v REA, the General Court, in first instance, ruled that the harm to the commercial interests outweighed the public interest in having such information disclosed as the requested documents related to the early stages of the research project. Today, the CJEU upheld this decision."

https://www.article19.org/resources/eu-court-denies-full-transparency-about-emotion-recognition/

mikarv, to random
@mikarv@someone.elses.computer avatar

Unsurprising but the clarify that you can't retain communications data under the limited powers associated with serious crime and then decide to use it to prosecute something else. fedi post: https://social.network.europa.eu/@Curia/111022918723074019 press release: https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2023-09/cp230135en.pdf

Screenshot of PDF in linked press release page 2

glynmoody, to random
@glynmoody@mastodon.social avatar

Third Time Lucky for Transatlantic Data Transfer Framework? Max Schrems Doesn’t Think So -https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/blog/third-time-lucky-for-transatlantic-data-transfer-framework/ and around we go again...

EDPS, to Podcast
@EDPS@social.network.europa.eu avatar

Our , the Newsletter Digest - episode6️⃣, is out now! Tune in to find out about our latest audit, what happens when an organisation breaches the , our decision on @Curia use of videoconferencing services, and more. Listen here🎧 https://europa.eu/!Rkgckv

nemobis, to Facebook
@nemobis@mamot.fr avatar

Inc. tries to go on processing «personal data unlawfully in violation of mentioned IE Decisions indefinitely. [...] However, compliance with legally binding orders is not a matter of negotiation. [...] The only way to ensure data subjects' rights and freedoms [...] is to urgently impose a temporary ban».
https://www.datatilsynet.no/contentassets/36ad4a92100943439df9a8a3a7015c19/urgent-and-provisional-measures--meta_redacted.pdf

Using the recent ruling by the , Norway's DPA bans behavioural advertising on FB and by urgency procedure. EDPB can extend the order.

EDPS, to random
@EDPS@social.network.europa.eu avatar

issues decision on the @Curia use of cloud videoconferencing services. Read Press Release https://europa.eu/!d8qJHb & Decision https://europa.eu/!Nt7gTD out now.

nemobis, to Bulgaria
@nemobis@mamot.fr avatar

The European Commission is determined to turn the and into a farce.
https://noyb.eu/en/european-commission-gives-eu-us-data-transfers-third-round-cjeu

Is there any useful precedent to sanction the EC for flouting rulings? I can only think of T-329/17 (against EFSA) and C-121/21 (against Poland).

Preliminary injunctions to suspend or disapply a Commission Implementing Decision while waiting for a new CJEU preliminary ruling? Fines (paid to whom?)? Awards of legal costs to including extrajudicial costs?

remixtures, to Bulgaria Portuguese
@remixtures@tldr.nettime.org avatar

: "Third attempt of the European Commission to get a stable agreement on EU-US data transfers will be likely back at the Court of Justice (CJEU) in a matter of months. The allegedly "new" Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework is largely a copy of the failed "Privacy Shield". Despite the European Commission's public relations efforts, there is little change in US law or the approach taken by the EU. The fundamental problem with FISA 702 was not addressed by the US, as the US still takes the view that only US persons are worthy of constitutional rights."

https://noyb.eu/en/european-commission-gives-eu-us-data-transfers-third-round-cjeu

privacat, to Futurology

is having a very bad year. The latest decision (issued by the yesterday in Meta Platforms Inc, et al., v. Bundeskartellamt, C-C252/21) adds to their woes, but more importantly, I anticipate it will force us all to re-evaluate , bases, special category data, and derived from that data.

In my article, I explore the case in detail, as well as some hypotheses on the impact of this decision broadly to , with examples.

But I'm curious to hear your thoughts and observations. Am I being a Cassandra? Overly pessimistic? Completely overthinking this? What implications am I missing?

I'll note here (even though I didn't mention it in the article) that this may also portend the effective death of the One Stop Shop mechanism, which is already on shaky ground after the whole spat between the and other regulators. Who needs Ireland if competition authorities can also raise issues under the GDPR?

CJEU case: https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document_print.jsf?mode=DOC&pageIndex=0&docid=275125&part=1&doclang=FR&text=&dir=&occ=first&cid=62013

Substack: https://careylening.substack.com/p/metas-wakeup-call-and-big-techs-new

Nickiquote, to Futurology
@Nickiquote@mstdn.social avatar

One interesting thing about choosing to launch in the EU but not the UK is that, as yet, there is hardly any divergence between EU and UK GDPR. Nor does either jurisdiction have an adequacy decision in place for transfers of data to US companies

Yesterday’s ruling which specifically dealt with the legal basis for targeted advertising is not binding precedent in the UK, but it is persuasive precedent and the only precedent.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • JUstTest
  • kavyap
  • DreamBathrooms
  • thenastyranch
  • magazineikmin
  • osvaldo12
  • khanakhh
  • Youngstown
  • mdbf
  • slotface
  • rosin
  • everett
  • ngwrru68w68
  • Durango
  • anitta
  • InstantRegret
  • GTA5RPClips
  • cubers
  • ethstaker
  • normalnudes
  • tacticalgear
  • cisconetworking
  • tester
  • Leos
  • modclub
  • megavids
  • provamag3
  • lostlight
  • All magazines