In this session, our panel will evaluate the EU-US Data Privacy Framework’s strengths and weaknesses and explain what businesses should be doing to safeguard against the scheme being overturned in court.
The EU-US data transfer problem remains unsolved after another year of GDPR enforcement. But is the light at the end of the tunnel with the EU-US Data Privacy Framework? Or will the adequacy decision go the same way as its two predecessors?
In this session, our panel will evaluate the EU-US Data Privacy Framework’s strengths and weaknesses and explain what businesses should be doing to safeguard against the scheme being overturned in court.
Paul Tang, a Member of the European Parliament, has raised concerns about the UK’s new Data Protection and Digital Information Bill (DPDI) and its potential to undermine elements of the GDPR.
The data privacy regulator in Italy has imposed a €50,000 fine on Trento for violating laws regarding the northern city’s use of artificial intelligence (AI) in urban surveillance schemes.
Within two months of its release, it reached 100 million active users, making it the fastest-growing consumer application ever launched.
The GDPR recognises a “risk-based approach” in several areas of data protection compliance. Controllers can adjust some data protection and security practices, taking into account factors such as the nature of the data, the resources of the organisation, and the “state of the art”.
Jurisdictions worldwide are improving their data protection frameworks—sometimes in the hope of obtaining EU adequacy, sometimes because the public demands them to do so. From definitions and principles to data subject rights, the influence of the GDPR is clear.
In this session, panellists will explore AI’s many potential GDPR pitfalls and address the “elephant in the room”: Is the AI industry fundamentally incompatible with a robust data protection regime?
No comments yet