Publications
Top Keywords
- AI Act (11)
- Art. 10 EVRM (25)
- Art. 17 CDSM Directive (13)
- Artificial intelligence (77)
- Big data (12)
- Constitutional and administrative law (11)
- Consumer law (11)
- Content moderation (22)
- Copyright (201)
- Cybersecurity (10)
- Data protection (29)
- Data protection law (11)
- Digital Services Act (DSA) (31)
- Digital Single Market (13)
- EU (19)
- EU law (25)
- Europe (12)
- Fake news (14)
- Freedom of expression (49)
- Fundamental rights (18)
- GDPR (22)
- Human rights (31)
- Intellectual property (30)
- Internet (24)
- Journalism (16)
- Kluwer Information Law Series (43)
- Licensing (14)
- Media law (29)
- Online platforms (20)
- Patent law (20)
- Personal data (35)
- Platforms (24)
- Privacy (327)
- Regulation (12)
- Social media (11)
- Software (10)
- Surveillance (11)
- Text and Data Mining (TDM) (21)
- Trademark law (15)
- Transparency (19)
Zo’n huisbezoek is niet zo onschuldig als het lijkt external link
EHRM geeft voorrang aan bescherming van persoonsgegevens external link
Annotatie bij EHRM 20 oktober 2015 (Pentikäinen / Finland) external link
Towards Author’s Paradise: The new Dutch Act on Authors’ Contracts external link
Singling out people without knowing their names – Behavioural targeting, pseudonymous data, and the new data protection regulation external link
Abstract
Information about millions of people is collected for behavioural targeting, a type of marketing that involves tracking people’s online behaviour for targeted advertising. It is hotly debated whether data protection law applies to behavioural targeting. Many behavioural targeting companies say that, as long as they do not tie names to data they hold about individuals, they do not process any personal data, and that, therefore, data protection law does not apply to them. European Data Protection Authorities, however, take the view that a company processes personal data if it uses data to single out a person, even if it cannot tie a name to these data. This paper argues that data protection law should indeed apply to behavioural targeting. Companies can often tie a name to nameless data about individuals. Furthermore, behavioural targeting relies on collecting information about individuals, singling out individuals, and targeting ads to individuals. Many privacy risks remain, regardless of whether companies tie a name to the information they hold about a person. A name is merely one of the identifiers that can be tied to data about a person, and it is not even the most practical identifier for behavioural targeting. Seeing data used to single out a person as personal data fits the rationale for data protection law: protecting fairness and privacy.
behavioural targeting, cookies, Data protection law, IP addresses, online behavioural advertising, Personal data, Privacy, profiling, pseudonymous data, tracking
RIS
Bibtex
“Onafhankelijkheid publieke omroep moet beter worden geborgd” external link
Bijdrage Rondetafelgesprek 11 februari 2016: Computercriminaliteit III external link
Het prinsesje onder de grondrechten external link
IE vincit omnia? Opsporing in de particuliere sector. external link
Abstract
Bevel aan Google tot afgifte ex. art. 28 lid 9 Aw van persoons- en adresgegevens van de houder van een Google Play account vanwege onrechtmatige verkoop van e-books. Voorwaarde dat de houder op grond van art. 40 Wbp verzet kan aantekenen tegen die afgifte bij de verantwoordelijke (Google). Grondrechtenconflict bescherming van eigendom, vrijheid van meningsuiting en privacy.
Grondrechten, Privacy