3 ms·

Hmm but do you interpret that to be the act of processing while the consent was in effect is not retrospectively made illegal, or to mean that data shared/obtai

Hmm but do you interpret that to be the act of processing while the consent was in effect is not retrospectively made illegal, or to mean that data shared/obtained while a concent was in effect is still legal to keep after the consent is withdrawn.

dogma1138 9y ago
You do not have to delete the data once consent is retracted, unless it's the only basis for lawful processing and even then I'm not entirely sure if deletion is mandated as archiving is allowed. Also (from B&B): "Individuals can require data to be ‘erased’ when there is a problem with the underlying legality of the processing or where they withdraw consent." This is also a bit vague but it looks like withdrawing consent does not invoke deletion explicitly, it might simply change the lawfulness of processing which might require you to delete data if it's you only use consent as the basis of your LP. However explicit consent is also not the only way to do "lawful processing" there are other ways to keep and get data. Tinder can claim lawful processing after a retraction of consent with other allowances under Article 6: 1) processing is necessary in order to protect the vital interests of the data subject or of another natural person; 2) processing is necessary for the purposes of the legitimate interests pursued by the controller or by a third party, except where such interests are overridden by the interests or fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subject which require protection of personal data, in particular where the data subject is a child. The 2nd one is pretty straight forward this is in essence a third party clause loophole, and the first one can be used by Tinder or the likes specifically in such cases where they would need to give data to the authorities in the such cases as sexual assault or harassment. There is also a difference with what the GDPR defines as "further processing", which what happens when you want to use information for other purposes than what consent was given for, there has to be a link but this is again vague enough to be on a case by case basis. "Further processing for archiving purposes in the public interest, scientific or historical research purposes or statistical purposes should be considered to be compatible lawful processing operations." Bird & Bird has a lot of free information on GDPR and it's real world implications for companies google them :)
- Msurrow 9y ago
  Oh I know the two birds fairly well :-) Completely agree that there are other basis for legality, but most of the seem to favor either the registered person or other laws. And that was sort of my thought when saying Tinder would have to delete if you withdraw consent: I would think consent would be the only grounds for processing data for a company like Tinder. Wrt 1 and 2 of article 6 you mention. I'd have though Tinder wouldnt be able to claim anything since for 1) the interest of the subject would the to delete it and 2) "Tinder making money on your data" cannot be considered a legitimate interest. And when it comes to Tinder havning to store due things like in the case of sexual assault they would still have to consider the priciples of limitation on what they use the data for (eg. cannot sell your sexual prefernces to adverticers if the only legal grounds is some law requirinh them to store data for a very scific cause), right? And then there is the whole notification to the subject thats going to be a major pain aswell. Anyway, not a lawyer, and all the special cases you point out is probably valid. But thats why the only really interesting thing is to see the first cases and judgements on this so we can get some indication of interpretation. And ofcourse seeing EU will actually execute the high fines - if not then all this wont have any effect anyway

dogma1138 9y ago

You do not have to delete the data once consent is retracted, unless it's the only basis for lawful processing and even then I'm not entirely sure if deletion is mandated as archiving is allowed. Also (from B&B): "Individuals can require data to be ‘erased’ when there is a problem with the underlying legality of the processing or where they withdraw consent." This is also a bit vague but it looks like withdrawing consent does not invoke deletion explicitly, it might simply change the lawfulness of processing which might require you to delete data if it's you only use consent as the basis of your LP. However explicit consent is also not the only way to do "lawful processing" there are other ways to keep and get data. Tinder can claim lawful processing after a retraction of consent with other allowances under Article 6: 1) processing is necessary in order to protect the vital interests of the data subject or of another natural person; 2) processing is necessary for the purposes of the legitimate interests pursued by the controller or by a third party, except where such interests are overridden by the interests or fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subject which require protection of personal data, in particular where the data subject is a child. The 2nd one is pretty straight forward this is in essence a third party clause loophole, and the first one can be used by Tinder or the likes specifically in such cases where they would need to give data to the authorities in the such cases as sexual assault or harassment. There is also a difference with what the GDPR defines as "further processing", which what happens when you want to use information for other purposes than what consent was given for, there has to be a link but this is again vague enough to be on a case by case basis. "Further processing for archiving purposes in the public interest, scientific or historical research purposes or statistical purposes should be considered to be compatible lawful processing operations." Bird & Bird has a lot of free information on GDPR and it's real world implications for companies google them :)

Msurrow 9y ago
Oh I know the two birds fairly well :-) Completely agree that there are other basis for legality, but most of the seem to favor either the registered person or other laws. And that was sort of my thought when saying Tinder would have to delete if you withdraw consent: I would think consent would be the only grounds for processing data for a company like Tinder. Wrt 1 and 2 of article 6 you mention. I'd have though Tinder wouldnt be able to claim anything since for 1) the interest of the subject would the to delete it and 2) "Tinder making money on your data" cannot be considered a legitimate interest. And when it comes to Tinder havning to store due things like in the case of sexual assault they would still have to consider the priciples of limitation on what they use the data for (eg. cannot sell your sexual prefernces to adverticers if the only legal grounds is some law requirinh them to store data for a very scific cause), right? And then there is the whole notification to the subject thats going to be a major pain aswell. Anyway, not a lawyer, and all the special cases you point out is probably valid. But thats why the only really interesting thing is to see the first cases and judgements on this so we can get some indication of interpretation. And ofcourse seeing EU will actually execute the high fines - if not then all this wont have any effect anyway