2 ms·

That isn't necessarily true either. IIRC, there was a case not so long ago of a school that was using quite aggressive surveillance measures, and obtained some

That isn't necessarily true either. IIRC, there was a case not so long ago of a school that was using quite aggressive surveillance measures, and obtained some degree of prior consent. It was still penalised under the GDPR, because all processing of personal data must be justified. Even consent is not carte blanche to do whatever you want, and that's probably a good thing for the same reason that inalienable consumer rights when you shop or employment rights when you take a job are probably good things. Edit: Apparently there are now at least two examples of this. In Sweden, relating to facial recognition: https://www.gamingtechlaw.com/2019/09/fine-gdpr-sweden.html https://www.gamingtechlaw.com/2019/09/fine-gdpr-sweden.html In Poland, relating to fingerprints: https://venturebeat.com/2020/03/06/polish-school-hit-with-gdpr-fine-for-using-fingerprints-to-verify-students-lunch-payments/ https://venturebeat.com/2020/03/06/polish-school-hit-with-gd...

gambiting 7y ago
Right, but both of these examples are about using personal data(facial recognition data and then fingerprints) for purposes where it's not needed. Again, I would see the issue if the employeer was taking pictures with the webcam every 30 seconds - that is definitely a privacy problem because you neither expect your employeer to be photographing you every 30 seconds, nor is it necessary for your job. But pictures of the screen? Screen that's meant to be used for work and where no reasonable expectation of privacy should exist?
- Retric 7y ago
  It’s a common practice at most companies to allow some minimal use of company equipment to check private email etc while on break. As soon as that’s allowed a reasonable expectation of privacy exists.
- Silhouette 7y ago
  You keep saying there is no reasonable expectation of privacy, but there is no basis in law for that position, at least not in the EU or UK. I've edited my earlier comments to add some sources, including a reference to the official guidance from the UK's national data protection authority that directly states that just because someone is at work it does not mean they have no expectation of privacy. You can also find lots of public commentary from employment lawyers on the Web where they have interpreted the GDPR similarly, similar statements from other national regulators, etc. Some of these highlight tricky situations like the need to respect personal email as well.

gambiting 7y ago

Right, but both of these examples are about using personal data(facial recognition data and then fingerprints) for purposes where it's not needed. Again, I would see the issue if the employeer was taking pictures with the webcam every 30 seconds - that is definitely a privacy problem because you neither expect your employeer to be photographing you every 30 seconds, nor is it necessary for your job. But pictures of the screen? Screen that's meant to be used for work and where no reasonable expectation of privacy should exist?

Retric 7y ago
It’s a common practice at most companies to allow some minimal use of company equipment to check private email etc while on break. As soon as that’s allowed a reasonable expectation of privacy exists.
Silhouette 7y ago
You keep saying there is no reasonable expectation of privacy, but there is no basis in law for that position, at least not in the EU or UK. I've edited my earlier comments to add some sources, including a reference to the official guidance from the UK's national data protection authority that directly states that just because someone is at work it does not mean they have no expectation of privacy. You can also find lots of public commentary from employment lawyers on the Web where they have interpreted the GDPR similarly, similar statements from other national regulators, etc. Some of these highlight tricky situations like the need to respect personal email as well.