Which of the following was the first to implement national law for data protection in 1973?
SCENARIO
Please use the following to answer the next question:
Zandelay Fashion ('Zandelay') is a successful international online clothing retailer that employs approximately 650 people at its headquarters based in Dublin, Ireland. Martin is their recently appointed data protection officer, who oversees the company's compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and other privacy legislation.
The company offers both male and female clothing lines across all age demographics, including children. In doing so, the company processes large amounts of information about such customers, including preferences and sensitive financial information such as credit card and bank account numbers.
In an aggressive bid to build revenue growth, Jerry, the CEO, tells Martin that the company is launching a new mobile app and loyalty scheme that puts significant emphasis on profiling the company's customers by analyzing their purchases. Martin tells the CEO that: (a) the potential risks of such activities means that Zandelay needs to carry out a data protection impact assessment to assess this new venture and its privacy implications; and (b) where the results of this assessment indicate a high risk in the absence of appropriate protection measures, Zandelay may have to undertake a prior consultation with the Irish Data Protection Commissioner before implementing the app and loyalty scheme.
Jerry tells Martin that he is not happy about the prospect of having to directly engage with a supervisory authority and having to disclose details of Zandelay's business plan and associated processing activities.
What would MOST effectively assist Zandelay in conducting their data protection impact assessment?
SCENARIO
Please use the following to answer the next question:
Liem, an online retailer known for its environmentally friendly shoes, has recently expanded its presence in Europe. Anxious to achieve market dominance, Liem teamed up with another eco friendly company, EcoMick, which sells accessories like belts and bags. Together the companies drew up a series of marketing campaigns designed to highlight the environmental and economic benefits of their products. After months of planning, Liem and EcoMick entered into a data sharing agreement to use the same marketing database, MarketIQ, to send the campaigns to their respective contacts.
Liem and EcoMick also entered into a data processing agreement with MarketIQ, the terms of which included processing personal data only upon Liem and EcoMick's instructions, and making available to them all information necessary to demonstrate compliance with GDPR obligations.
Liem and EcoMick then procured the services of a company called JaphSoft, a marketing optimization firm that uses machine learning to help companies run successful campaigns. Clients provide JaphSoft with the personal data of individuals they would like to be targeted in each campaign. To ensure protection of its clients' data, JaphSoft implements the technical and organizational measures it deems appropriate. JaphSoft works to continually improve its machine learning models by analyzing the data it receives from its clients to determine the most successful components of a successful campaign. JaphSoft then uses such models in providing services to its client-base. Since the models improve only over a period of time as more information is collected, JaphSoft does not have a deletion process for the data it receives from clients. However, to ensure compliance with data privacy rules, JaphSoft pseudonymizes the personal data by removing identifying information from the contact information. JaphSoft's engineers, however, maintain all contact information in the same database as the identifying information.
Under its agreement with Liem and EcoMick, JaphSoft received access to MarketIQ, which included contact information as well as prior purchase history for such contacts, to create campaigns that would result in the most views of the two companies' websites. A prior Liem customer, Ms. Iman, received a marketing campaign from JaphSoft regarding Liem's as well as EcoMick's latest products. While Ms. Iman recalls checking a box to receive information in the future regarding Liem's products, she has never shopped EcoMick, nor provided her personal data to that company.
JaphSoft's use of pseudonymization is NOT in compliance with the CDPR because?
SCENARIO
Please use the following to answer the next question:
Javier is a member of the fitness club EVERFIT. This company has branches in many EU member states, but for the purposes of the GDPR maintains its primary establishment in France. Javier lives in Newry, Northern Ireland (part of the U.K.), and commutes across the border to work in Dundalk, Ireland. Two years ago while on a business trip, Javier was photographed while working out at a branch of EVERFIT in Frankfurt, Germany. At the time, Javier gave his consent to being included in the photograph, since he was told that it would be used for promotional purposes only. Since then, the photograph has been used in the club's U.K. brochures, and it features in the landing page of its U.K. website. However, the fitness club has recently fallen into disrepute due to widespread mistreatment of members at various branches of the club in several EU member states. As a result, Javier no longer feels comfortable with his photograph being publicly associated with the fitness club.
After numerous failed attempts to book an appointment with the manager of the local branch to discuss this matter, Javier sends a letter to EVETFIT requesting that his image be removed from the website and all promotional materials. Months pass and Javier, having received no acknowledgment of his request, becomes very anxious about this matter. After repeatedly failing to contact EVETFIT through alternate channels, he decides to take action against the company.
Javier contacts the U.K. Information Commissioner's Office ('ICO' - the U.K.'s supervisory authority) to lodge a complaint about this matter. The ICO, pursuant to Article 56 (3) of the GDPR, informs the CNIL (i.e. the supervisory authority of EVERFIT's main establishment) about this matter. Despite the fact that EVERFIT has an establishment in the U.K., the CNIL decides to handle the case in accordance with Article 60 of the GDPR. The CNIL liaises with the ICO, as relevant under the cooperation procedure. In light of issues amongst the supervisory authorities to reach a decision, the European Data Protection Board becomes involved and, pursuant to the consistency mechanism, issues a binding decision.
Additionally, Javier sues EVERFIT for the damages caused as a result of its failure to honor his request to have his photograph removed from the brochure and website.
Assuming that multiple EVETFIT branches across several EU countries are acting as separate data controllers, and that each of those branches were responsible for mishandling Javier's request, how may Javier proceed in order to seek compensation?
Which area of privacy is a lead supervisory authority's (LSA) MAIN concern?
