The European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS), Peter Hustinx, recently published a response to a European Commission consultation on reform of the “notice-and-action” (“N&A”) procedure rules — i.e., the legal regime that requires Internet intermediaries to remove hosted content when they are notified that such content is illegal.  As set out in more detail below, the EDPS response draws attention to the impact of N&A procedures on data protection and privacy rights, and voices support for a variety of measures, including harmonising the definition of “illegal content”, clarifying the definition of “hosting” and the extent to which hosting providers should take proactive steps to remove illegal content.

The EDPS’s views will be added to those of other stakeholders including rightholders, many of whom have called for a transparent and user-friendly procedure that includes an accessible appeals process and sanctions against abusive notices.  Rightholders also see value in intermediaries providing APIs that enable rightholders to remove infringing content directly, as some online platforms already do today.

Key points raised by the EDPS include:

  • Harmonising the definition of ‘illegal content’ across Europe for the purpose of N&A procedures.  The EDPS highlights that additional safeguards may be necessary when sensitive personal data is processed, and suggests that, in certain cases, it may be more appropriate for illegal content to be reported to a regulatory authority rather than to a hosting provider for removal.
  • Clarifying the definition of ‘hosting’ to take account of the current digital environment.  The EDPS emphasizes that online social networks are ‘data controllers’ in respect of personal information uploaded to their sites, as well as content hosts under European data protection law.
  • Developing harmonised procedures and forms for notifications to hosts of illegal content.  The EDPS adds that harmonised forms and procedures would need to take full account of European data protection law — for example, by developing “privacy by design” compliant notification forms that only require the minimum necessary amount of personal data about senders of notices and of the other persons involved (e.g. complainant, suspect, witnesses, etc.). 
  • Clarifying the proactive measures to be taken by hosting providers.  The EDPS refers to questions over the scope of Article 15 of the E-Commerce Directive (Directive 2000/31/EC), which states that hosting providers have no ‘general obligation to monitor’ users’ illegal activity on their networks. This provision has been thrown into sharper relief following the CJEU decision in Scarlet Extended SA v SABAM (C‑70/10), decided in 2011.  In that case, partially to protect fundamental rights of privacy, the CJEU ruled against broad-based proactive filtering by ISPs for the purpose of protecting against copyright infringement.  The EDPS has commented several times in the past on this issue.

The consultation period for answering the European Commission’s questionnaire is now closed.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Mark Young Mark Young

Mark Young is an experienced tech regulatory lawyer and a vice-chair of Covington’s Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group. He advises major global companies on their most challenging data privacy compliance matters and investigations. Mark also leads on EMEA cybersecurity matters at the…

Mark Young is an experienced tech regulatory lawyer and a vice-chair of Covington’s Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group. He advises major global companies on their most challenging data privacy compliance matters and investigations. Mark also leads on EMEA cybersecurity matters at the firm. In these contexts, he has worked closely with some of the world’s leading technology and life sciences companies and other multinationals.

Mark has been recognized for several years in Chambers UK as “a trusted adviser – practical, results-oriented and an expert in the field;” “fast, thorough and responsive;” “extremely pragmatic in advice on risk;” “provides thoughtful, strategic guidance and is a pleasure to work with;” and has “great insight into the regulators.” According to the most recent edition (2024), “He’s extremely technologically sophisticated and advises on true issues of first impression, particularly in the field of AI.”

Drawing on over 15 years of experience, Mark specializes in:

  • Advising on potential exposure under GDPR and international data privacy laws in relation to innovative products and services that involve cutting-edge technology, e.g., AI, biometric data, and connected devices.
  • Providing practical guidance on novel uses of personal data, responding to individuals exercising rights, and data transfers, including advising on Binding Corporate Rules (BCRs) and compliance challenges following Brexit and Schrems II.
  • Helping clients respond to investigations by data protection regulators in the UK, EU and globally, and advising on potential follow-on litigation risks.
  • Counseling ad networks (demand and supply side), retailers, and other adtech companies on data privacy compliance relating to programmatic advertising, and providing strategic advice on complaints and claims in a range of jurisdictions.
  • Advising life sciences companies on industry-specific data privacy issues, including:
    • clinical trials and pharmacovigilance;
    • digital health products and services; and
    • engagement with healthcare professionals and marketing programs.
  • International conflict of law issues relating to white collar investigations and data privacy compliance (collecting data from employees and others, international transfers, etc.).
  • Advising various clients on the EU NIS2 Directive and UK NIS regulations and other cybersecurity-related regulations, particularly (i) cloud computing service providers, online marketplaces, social media networks, and other digital infrastructure and service providers, and (ii) medical device and pharma companies, and other manufacturers.
  • Helping a broad range of organizations prepare for and respond to cybersecurity incidents, including personal data breaches, IP and trade secret theft, ransomware, insider threats, supply chain incidents, and state-sponsored attacks. Mark’s incident response expertise includes:
    • supervising technical investigations and providing updates to company boards and leaders;
    • advising on PR and related legal risks following an incident;
    • engaging with law enforcement and government agencies; and
    • advising on notification obligations and other legal risks, and representing clients before regulators around the world.
  • Advising clients on risks and potential liabilities in relation to corporate transactions, especially involving companies that process significant volumes of personal data (e.g., in the adtech, digital identity/anti-fraud, and social network sectors.)
  • Providing strategic advice and advocacy on a range of UK and EU technology law reform issues including data privacy, cybersecurity, ecommerce, eID and trust services, and software-related proposals.
  • Representing clients in connection with references to the Court of Justice of the EU.