3 ms·

"It makes us more profitable, tough" is patently not a legitimate interest, and would fail the balancing test (the individual's interest overrides the legitimat

"It makes us more profitable, tough" is patently not a legitimate interest, and would fail the balancing test (the individual's interest overrides the legitimate interest). If it were as simple as "it helps fund our operation", the whole of the GDPR would be instantly rendered toothless as why else would they gather unnecessary data? It would open a "loophole" that lets everything through. https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/lawful-basis-for-processing/legitimate-interests/ https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio... Don't know of Germany's position but the UK's ICO added significant staff and budget when the switch from Data Protection to GDPR came in.

luckylion 7y ago
From all I've heard, making a profit isn't overridden by the individual's interest not to be tracked - otherwise, Google Ads wouldn't exist in Europe, at all, and Remarketing especially not. It's not unnecessary data - FB needs that data to target users with ads, the shop needs FB to show ads to people that are likely to buy what they've been shown. I do agree with you that this would be very different if there was no business interest in tracking users, but there is.
- NeedMoreTea 7y ago
  As far as I know, remarketing hasn't yet been shown to be valid at all under GDPR. Someone probably needs to make a test complaint. There may already be one in the works. It's but a detail within the general case of Google or FB advertising in general. Google Ads have already been fined €44m under GDPR, and I believe there is another case already in the French system. Showing ads is not the service provided as no one at all would accept them optionally. FB, and Google, should be targeting in non-personal ways even where that necessitates less targeting. That was part of the point on which Google got their €44m fine. As seen in TFA, the web of third party tracking appears more liable, and in need of consent than many, particularly American companies with a vested interest, have claimed whilst hiding behind those.

luckylion 7y ago

From all I've heard, making a profit isn't overridden by the individual's interest not to be tracked - otherwise, Google Ads wouldn't exist in Europe, at all, and Remarketing especially not. It's not unnecessary data - FB needs that data to target users with ads, the shop needs FB to show ads to people that are likely to buy what they've been shown. I do agree with you that this would be very different if there was no business interest in tracking users, but there is.

NeedMoreTea 7y ago
As far as I know, remarketing hasn't yet been shown to be valid at all under GDPR. Someone probably needs to make a test complaint. There may already be one in the works. It's but a detail within the general case of Google or FB advertising in general. Google Ads have already been fined €44m under GDPR, and I believe there is another case already in the French system. Showing ads is not the service provided as no one at all would accept them optionally. FB, and Google, should be targeting in non-personal ways even where that necessitates less targeting. That was part of the point on which Google got their €44m fine. As seen in TFA, the web of third party tracking appears more liable, and in need of consent than many, particularly American companies with a vested interest, have claimed whilst hiding behind those.