Online translation tools offer a convenient way of having technical terms automatically translated into or from another language in both professional and private everyday life. Depending on the provider, such tools can also be used to translate long texts or at least passages of text. In the meantime, online translation tools are constantly being further developed using artificial intelligence processes, so that the end user receives ever better results from their translation. Employees in the professional environment are also increasingly making use of the support of such tools. From a data protection point of view, however, such services involve risks. Find out in our blog article which tools you can use and to what extent to ensure data protection-compliant use.

The corona pandemic has often forced companies, more or less overnight, to let employees work from home. In order to maintain operations and, above all, internal and external communication, video conferencing has become the new communication standard worldwide, at an almost unbelievable speed. But which video conferencing system is the best choice in terms of data protection compliance?

At its meeting on January 29, 2020 in Brussels, the European Data Protection Committee (EDPB) passed the guideline on the GDPR-compliant use of video surveillance by a large majority. The supervisory authorities of the EU member states are once again focusing on the principles of proportionality. Every video surveillance represents a clear encroachment on the personal rights of those affected, which is why the operator of the video surveillance system must always have a “legitimate interest”.

Even after Brexit, data transfer to the United Kingdom will be possible without additional measures. You can find out more about this below.

The supervisory authority RLP imposes a fine of EUR 105,000 after a GDPR violation

The State Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information Rhineland-Palatinate (LfDI) has imposed a fine of 105,000 euros on a hospital in Rhineland-Palatinate. At the same time, the LfDI welcomes the resilient efforts made by the hospital to sustainably promote further developments and improvements in data protection management.

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) pronounced its judgment on July 29, 2019 in the case C-40/17 (Fashion ID). After the decision of the ECJ on the joint responsibility of the service provider Facebook and the fan page operator, the ECJ developed its case law on joint responsibility in the “Fashion ID” case; this time with far-reaching consequences for almost every website operator. The ECJ ruled that the concept of responsibility should be interpreted broadly and that both the integrator and the third-party provider could be responsible for the integration of third-party content. There is then a joint responsibility according to Art. 26 GDPR, which is limited to the extent that the person responsible actually decides on the purposes and means of data processing.

A large amount of personal data can be found on an identity card. In many industries, particularly with regard to the Money Laundering Act, the question arises as to which personal data may be noted or copied and to what extent, or whether the ID card may even be scanned. In the following we give you a brief overview.

The GDPR meets practice. At the data protection day in Cologne on September 24th, 2019, experts discussed concrete implementation experiences with the new regulations. A surprising amount is still open. The point of contention is, in particular, the obligation to report data breaches.

The second European Payment Services Directive (PSD2), which applies within the EU and contains both regulatory and civil law elements, has been in full effect since September 14, 2019. What does this mean? What exactly is to be observed? What effects does PSD2 have on data protection for payment data? You can find out in the article.