4 ms·
"Disclosing an IP address" maybe a matter of the medium of comms being inadvertently TCP/IP, if MS does not log or store the IP in a meaningful/reversible way,
by sirius87 3y ago
"Disclosing an IP address" maybe a matter of the medium of comms being inadvertently TCP/IP, if MS does not log or store the IP in a meaningful/reversible way, are they processing PII?
- cowl 3y agoin the Google fonts CDN the court ruled that: it's irrelevant if the website or Google had the opportunity to link the IP address to the user. the mere possibility of this is enough to consider it as protected PII.
- sirius87 3y agoQuestion is whether Google Fonts CDN/server was storing the IP address or not. Linking to a user is secondary. If a server does not log or store raw IPs in the first place, where's the fault?
- cowl 3y agoMy man you are arguing with an established case verdict. https://rewis.io/urteile/urteil/lhm-20-01-2022-3-o-1749320/ https://rewis.io/urteile/urteil/lhm-20-01-2022-3-o-1749320/ The wording that is irrelevant what Google does with the IP (just the theoretical possibility of misuse is enough) is in the case verdict.
- iudqnolq 3y agoPer Wikipedia Germany's legal system doesn't have the concept of binding precedent. (And even if it did in no country is the decision of a trial court binding precedent).