The full PDF with the investigation results e.a. as sent to clearview: https://www.autoriteitpersoonsgegevens.nl/en/system/files?fi...
> The Dutch agency said that building the database and insufficiently informing people whose images appear in the database amounted to serious breaches of the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR.
what limits do we place on countries randomly being able to make supranational claims like this? do you want every online business checking the passport of their customer? because sure this case is fine but its a pretty dangerous precedent to accept without limits. for all its good intentions, GDPR has also resulted in cookie banner spam on the rest of us.
as with all government power - u may be fine when its used against things you dont like, but try to imagine when its used to against things you do...
Even the fine itself is a bit problematic because it looks like unenforceable as they don't operate in the EU thus not subject to EU law.
However if it were to be discovered that the user images where not only retrieved by scrapping publicly available information, but involved data brokerage or other forms of personal information selling all those involved throughout that chain could be fined.
One day all of these things will be taken for granted because we will capture more and more video of public spaces, and AI facial recognition will be more accurate than human facial recognition.
>[Clearview Chief Legal Officer] Mulcaire said in his statement that Clearview doesn't fall under EU data protection regulations.
>"Clearview AI does not have a place of business in the Netherlands or the EU, it does not have any customers in the Netherlands or the EU, and does not undertake any activities that would otherwise mean it is subject to the GDPR," he said.
-------------
>The Dutch agency said that building the database and insufficiently informing people whose images appear in the database amounted to serious breaches of the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR.
> "Facial recognition is a highly intrusive technology, that you cannot simply unleash on anyone in the world," DPA chairman Aleid Wolfsen said in a statement.
> "If there is a photo of you on the Internet — and doesn't that apply to all of us? — then you can end up in the database of Clearview and be tracked. This is not a doom scenario from a scary film. Nor is it something that could only be done in China," he said.
-----------------
If you're pulling data from European Citizens from all over the internet, I'd imagine that the EU does get a say (since it's literally data processing of EU citizen data). I'd also expect that the EU could just make one of the other upstream suppliers of Clearview data responsible for enforcement.
To seek any sort of judgement or criminal charge against them the EU would need to find an applicable law in the US that covers the activity.
While some people might be upset because GDPR isn't a stick they can use to beat Clearview with, this legal framework is the same that allows you to post material critical of the Chinese government without facing financial penalties or extradition.
That’s cute. I wonder where all the faces are coming from.
The word infinite here is probably a little out of place. But it's a statement of your feelings so it can well be an accurate reflection of them.
“Go eu go. Bankrupt those bastards and jail them all. Go eu go. Give it to them hard”
The only negative that really jumps out to me are cookie consent banners, but those are more malicious compliance than the fault of the EU.
