This preliminary ruling interprets point (e) of the first subparagraph of Article 6(1) and Article 9(1) of

Fantastic news! We've Found the answer you've been seeking!

Question:

This preliminary ruling interprets point (e) of the first subparagraph of Article 6(1) and Article 9(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (the GDPR). Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (the GDPR). The referring court's second question is whether the prohibition on processing special categories of personal data in Article 9(1) of the GDPR means that publishing personal data liable to indirectly disclose a natural person's political opinions, trade union membership, or sexual orientation on the website of the public authority responsible for collecting and checking declarations of private interests constitutes Svetlana Yakovleva's instructional material. The Advocate General noted that the verb "reveal" is consistent with processing both inherently sensitive data and data revealing sensitive information indirectly, following an intellectual operation involving deduction or cross-referencing. GDPR Article 4 covers healthcare services, and Paragraph 61 states that Directive 95/46 and GDPR protect personal data. Article 8(1) and Article 9(1) of the GDPR provide enhanced protection for processing that is liable to constitute a serious interference with the fundamental rights to respect for private life and personal data protection. Publishing personal data that may indirectly disclose a natural person's sexual orientation on the website of the public authority responsible for collecting and checking declarations of private interests constitutes special category data processing.

COURT CONFIRMS THAT IP ADDRESSES ARE PERSONAL DATA IN SOME CASES:

IP addresses are considered personal data under EU data protection laws, and Patrick Breyer sued the BRD over this. The Berlin Regional Court ruled on appeal that website owners' IP addresses are personal data, and the BGH submitted CJEU two Directive 95/46/EC interpretation issues. The Directive's Article 2(a) defines personal data as "any information related to an identified or identifiable natural person ('data subject'). EU Article 29 Working Party Opinion 4/2007. Directive Recital 26 helped the CJEU find someone by determining whether Mr. Breyer's changing IP address and other information may indirectly identify him. IP addresses are legally private and can be used for customer engagement, website analytics, targeted online advertising, etc. Companies should consider IP addresses personal data if they can identify persons (e.g., by login credentials, cookies, or other information or technology). Uncertainty may limit IP address disclosure if someone breaks contract and exposes more. The GDPR will be enforced on 25 May 2018.

BASED ON THEJUDGEMENT OF THE COURT EXCERPTED AND BASED ON THE COURT CONFIRMS THAT IP ADRESSES ARE PERSONAL DATA IN SOME CASES. ANSWER THE TWO QUESTIONS BELOW:

QUESTIONS:

Do you agree that an IP address constitutes "personal data" under the GDPR or other data protection laws? Why or why not?
Identify three issues that might arise from including an IP address in the definition of personal data under GDPR and treating such identifiers the same under the law as a passport number or social security number.