4 ms·
The way art 30(5) is drafted though means that the exception applies to basically nobody. What business can, honestly, say that it only occasionally processes p
by hedders 7y ago
The way art 30(5) is drafted though means that the exception applies to basically nobody. What business can, honestly, say that it only occasionally processes personal data? Does it have no employees? Does it only occasionally communicate with people? That hardly seems likely.
Yes, it's probably a drafting defect, but I think one would be very brave indeed to try to rely on it, especially given that establishing an art 30 record is, practically speaking, a prerequisite for being in a position to comply with the rest of GDPR.
- diminoten 7y agoThen I guess we're back to letting big companies, who have the resources to do this shit, have Europe, and the small companies, who are too busy building new things, will just grow in other areas before expanding to the EU.
- Silhouette 7y agoThe way art 30(5) is drafted though means that the exception applies to basically nobody. Unfortunately, this is a good demonstration of two criticisms made of the GDPR right from the start: the costs of creating new paperwork in the approved format even if it makes no material difference to any actual data processing, and ambiguity about what is required or permitted even in quite fundamental respects.
- gcthomas 7y agoThe exemption is only for the record keeping requirement to help keep costs down. Every organisation still needs to meet the data protection regulations.