Digital Omnibus proposal· Recital 44
Text
Recital 44 Digital Omnibus proposal as printed in the Council text of 22 October 2026
Source Council, 22 October 2026. Recital 44: ST 14756/26, page 45 · exact text page
The storing of information, or the gaining of access to information already stored, in a terminal equipment and the subsequent processing of such data should be regulated under a single legal framework, namely Directive 2002/58/EC on privacy and electronic communications , where the subscriber of the electronic communications service or the user of the terminal equipment is a natural person. The amendments to this Directive should continue to offer the highest levels of protection for personal data, while simplifying the experiences of data subjects in exerting their rights and expressing their choices online. The amendments concern in particular storage of information in that equipment, accessing or otherwise collecting information from that equipment that entails the processing of personal data through cookies or similar technologies to gain information from the terminal equipment. Privacy enhancing technologies that reduce the processing of personal data and support the effective implementation of the obligations of data minimisation and data protection by design and by default under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 can play a crucial role in maintaining citizens’ trust in online digital ecosystems and it is important to incentivise the update of such technologies .
How the recitals changed
Each text against the text before it
| Recital | Commission19 Nov 2025Rec 44 | Council21 May 2026Rec 44 | Council10 Jun 2026Rec 44–44c | Council18 Jun 2026Rec 44–44c | Council3 Sep 2026Rec 44–44g | Council2 Oct 2026Rec 44–44g | Council22 Oct 2026Rec 44–44g |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compared with | law in force | the proposal | 21 May text | 10 Jun text | 18 Jun text | 3 Sep text | 2 Oct text |
| Recital 44 | 44 Added | 44 Changed | 44 Changed | 44 Unchanged | 44 Unchanged | 44 Changed | 44 Unchanged |
| Recital 44a | In neither text | In neither text | 44a Added | 44a Unchanged | 44a Unchanged | 44a Unchanged | 44a Unchanged |
| Recital 44b | In neither text | In neither text | 44b Added | 44b Changed | 44b Changed keeps the first three sentences | 44b Unchanged | 44b Unchanged |
| Recital 44c | In neither text | In neither text | In neither text | In neither text | 44c Added Some sentences moved | 44c Unchanged | 44c Unchanged |
| Recital 44d | In neither text | In neither text | In neither text | In neither text | 44d Added | 44d Changed keeps the first five sentences | 44d Unchanged |
| Recital 44e (new in ST 13886/26) | In neither text | In neither text | In neither text | In neither text | In neither text | 44e Added Some sentences moved | 44e Unchanged Wording check |
| Recital 44e | In neither text | In neither text | In neither text | In neither text | 44e Added | 44f Changed | 44f Unchanged |
| Recital 44f | In neither text | In neither text | In neither text | In neither text | 44f Added | 44g Changed | 44g Unchanged |
| Recital 44g | In neither text | In neither text | 44c Added | 44c Unchanged | 44g Unchanged | 44g Changed | 44g Unchanged |
Each text against the text before it: +Added in this text, not in the text before~Changed wording changed=Unchanged same as the text before— in neither text
Wording moved the wording comes from a different earlier recital Wording check the wording is closer to a different earlier recital
Parliament amendments propose other recitals under these numbers: Recital 44a (new).
Renumbering and wording
3 September to 2 October 2026
ST 13886/26 renumbers the 3 September recitals 44e and 44f as 44f and 44g and adds a new recital 44e.
| 2 October recital | Renumbered from | Wording |
|---|---|---|
| 44 | 3 September 44same number | Changed from 3 September recital 44 |
| 44a | 3 September 44asame number | Same wording as 3 September recital 44a |
| 44b | 3 September 44bsame number | Same wording as 3 September recital 44b |
| 44c | 3 September 44csame number | Same wording as 3 September recital 44c |
| 44d | 3 September 44dsame number | Changed from 3 September recital 44d |
| 44eRecital 44e (new in ST 13886/26) | no earlier recital | New in this text Some sentences moved from 3 September recital 44d (sentences 6 to 10) |
| 44fRecital 44e | 3 September 44erenumbered in this text | Changed from 3 September recital 44e |
| 44gRecital 44f | 3 September 44frenumbered in this text | Changed from 3 September recital 44f |
| 44g | 3 September 44gsame number | Changed from 3 September recital 44g |
Parliament amendments
45 amendments to this recital
14 amendments would delete the whole recital: members of The Left, S&D, Greens/EFA and ECR.
| Type | The Left | S&D | Greens/EFA | Renew | EPP | ECR | PfE | NI | Rapporteur |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| − Deletion | 8 | 3 | 2 | · | · | 1 | · | · | · |
| ~ Alternative | 1 | 1 | 6 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 1 |
| + Addition | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | 1 |
By political group
- − Deletion The Left 8 S&D 3 Greens/EFA 2 ECR 1
- ~ Alternative The Left 1 S&D 1 Greens/EFA 6 Renew 7 EPP 6 ECR 5 PfE 1 NI 3 Rapporteur 1
- + Addition Rapporteur 1
Show
21 ~Alternative Alex Agius Saliba (rapporteur)Rapporteur · IMCO “With a view to reducing the compliance burden and providing legal clarity to controllers and providers, and given that certain purposes of processing…”
With a view to reducing the compliance burden and providing legal clarity to controllers and providers, and given that certain purposes of processing pose a low risk to the rights and freedoms of data subjects or that such processing may be necessary to provide a service explicitly requested by the data subject, it is necessary to define a limitative list of purposes for which the processing should be permitted without consent. As regards storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment, and subsequent processing that is strictly necessary and proportionate for those purposes, this Regulation should therefore provide that the processing is lawful. The controller, such as a media service provider, may mandate a processor, such as a market research company, to carry out the processing on its behalf.
- Rapporteur
- Alex Agius Saliba
- Group
- Rapporteur
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- IMCO draft opinion
- Source
- Official text, page 24
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 3
22 +Addition Alex Agius Saliba (rapporteur)Rapporteur · IMCO “Providers wishing to process aggregated information should anonymise such information immediately. They may mandate a third party to carry out the…”
Providers wishing to process aggregated information should anonymise such information immediately. They may mandate a third party to carry out the processing, provided that the latter exclusively process the data solely for the use of the provider. No subsequent processing of information for other purposes than those defined in the limitative list should take place.
- Rapporteur
- Alex Agius Saliba
- Group
- Rapporteur
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- IMCO draft opinion
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 3 a (new)
176 ~Alternative David CormandGreens/EFA · IMCO “The introduction of Article 88a in the GDPR should continue to offer the highest levels of protection, in particular consumer protection and privacy…”
The storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment and the subsequent processing of such data should be regulated under a single legal framework, namely Regulation (EU) 2016/679, where the subscriber of the electronic communications service or the user of the terminal equipment is a natural person. The amendments presented in this Regulation continue to offer the highest levels of protection for personal data, while simplifying the experiences of data subjects in exerting their rights and expressing their choices online. The amendments concern in particular storage of information in that equipment, accessing or otherwise collecting information from that equipment that entails the processing of personal data through cookies or similar technologies to gain information from the terminal equipment. The relevant rules should also apply regardless of whether the terminal equipment is owned by the natural person or by another legal or natural person.The introduction of Article 88a in the GDPR should continue to offer the highest levels of protection, in particular consumer protection and privacy, while simplifying the experiences of consumers in exerting their rights and expressing their choices online. This article should be seen as strengthening Article 5 of Directive 2002/58/EC on privacy and electronic communications (‘ePrivacy Directive’), last revised in 2009, by providing specific rules in relation to processing of personal data in the context of electronic communication services. The amendments concern in particular access to and storage of personal data in the terminal equipment, accessing or otherwise collecting personal data from that equipment through cookies or similar technologies to gain information from the terminal equipment. As this access and storage constitute by itself an interference with the private sphere of a consumers as protected by Article 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, it begs the question whether the information qualifies as personal data. The storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment should therefore continue to be allowed only on the basis of consent and be subject to clear rules able to guarantee a high level of protection of consumers while safeguarding the functioning of the internal market. Rules governing the storing of information in terminal equipment and access to such information protect the confidentiality of communications and the integrity of user devices. These protections apply independently of whether the information accessed constitutes personal data and apply regardless of whether the information accessed constitutes personal data. With a view of providing legal clarity it is necessary to define a limitative list of purposes, strictly defined and necessary, for which the processing should be permitted without consent. These exemptions should be interpreted strictly. Non-personalised advertising is a form of advertising that provides the highest level of consumer protection as it minimizes the collection of consumer data while still ensuring the provision of advertising on the internal market and the establishment of new businesses models in this sector. In the context of Article 88a (3) (d) (a) (new) it shall not involve the retention, storage, reuse or linking of any data generated in connection with such interaction, nor the processing, inference or use of any data relating to the consumer’s location whether precise or approximate, including where such location data is derived, inferred or processed in aggregated anonymized form. Contextual advertising as defined in Article 4 (b) (xx) and in the context of Article 88a (3) (d) (a) (new) shall not involve the retention, storage, reuse or linking of any data generated in connection with such interaction, nor the processing, inference or use of any data relating to the consumer’s location whether precise or approximate, including where such location data is derived, inferred or processed in aggregated anonymized form. If a controller invokes the exception of Article 88a (3) (d) (a) (new) , the controller will not be able to engage in any other advertising activities other than contextual advertising as defined in Article (4) (b) (xx), including, but not limited, personalised and targeted advertising activities as defined in the EDPB Guidelines 8/2020 on the targeting of social media use.- Tabled by
- David Cormand on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group
- Group
- Greens/EFA
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- IMCO amendments 125–328 to the draft opinion
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 1
177 −Deletion David CormandGreens/EFA · IMCO Deletes the recital
The storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment should continue to be allowed only on the basis of consent. Similar to the approach in Directive 2002/58/EC, this requirement should not preclude storing of personal data, or gaining of access to personal data already stored, in the terminal equipment of a natural person, when that is based on Union or Member State law within the meaning of Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and if it fulfils all conditions of lawfulness laid down in that provision, and is done for the objectives laid down in Article 23(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.- Tabled by
- David Cormand on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group
- Group
- Greens/EFA
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- IMCO amendments 125–328 to the draft opinion
- Source
- Official text, page 54
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 2
178 ~Alternative Sophia KircherEPP · IMCO “The storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment should continue to be allowed only on…”
The storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment should continue to be allowed only on the basis of consent. Similar to the approach in Directive 2002/58/EC, this requirement should not preclude storing of personal data, or gaining of access to personal data already stored, in the terminal equipment of a natural person, when that is based on Union
or Member Statelaw within the meaning of Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and if it fulfils all conditions of lawfulness laid down in that provision, and is done for the objectives laid down in Article 23(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.- Tabled by
- Sophia Kircher
- Group
- EPP
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- IMCO amendments 125–328 to the draft opinion
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 2
179 ~Alternative David CormandGreens/EFA · IMCO “Controllers wishing to collect aggregated information of consumers should anonymise such information instantly and may mandate a processor to carry…”
With a view to reducing the compliance burden and providing legal clarity to controllers, and given that certain purposes of processing pose a low risk to the rights and freedoms of data subjects or that such processing may be necessary to provide a service explicitly requested by the data subject, it is necessary to define a limitative list of purposes for which the processing should be permitted without consent. As regards storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment, and subsequent processing that is strictly necessary and proportionate for those purposes, this Regulation should therefore provide that the processing is lawful. The controller, such as a media service provider, may mandate a processor, such as a market research company, to carry out the processing on its behalf. Controllers wishing to collect aggregated information of consumers should anonymise such information instantly and may mandate a processor to carry out the processing, provided that the processor will exclusively process the data for the use of the controller. No subsequent processing of personal data for other purposes than those defined in the limitative list should take place.
- Tabled by
- David Cormand on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group
- Group
- Greens/EFA
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- IMCO amendments 125–328 to the draft opinion
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 3
180 ~Alternative Sabine VerheyenEPP · IMCO “and Joint Industry Controller”
With a view to reducing the compliance burden and providing legal clarity to controllers, and given that certain purposes of processing pose a low risk to the rights and freedoms of data subjects or that such processing may be necessary to provide a service requested by the data subject, it is necessary to define a limitative list of purposes for which the processing should be permitted without consent. As regards storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment, and subsequent processing that is necessary for those purposes, this Regulation should therefore provide that the processing is lawful. The controller, such as a media service provider, may mandate a processor or joint controller, such as a market research company and Joint Industry Controller, to carry out the processing jointly or on its behalf.
- Tabled by
- Sabine Verheyen
- Group
- EPP
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- IMCO amendments 125–328 to the draft opinion
- Source
- Official text, page 56
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 3
181 ~Alternative Christian DoleschalEPP · IMCO “and Joint Industry Committee”
With a view to reducing the compliance burden and providing legal clarity to controllers, and given that certain purposes of processing pose a low risk to the rights and freedoms of data subjects or that such processing may be necessary to provide a service requested by the data subject, it is necessary to define a limitative list of purposes for which the processing should be permitted without consent. As regards storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment, and subsequent processing that is necessary for those purposes, this Regulation should therefore provide that the processing is lawful. The controller, such as a media service provider, may mandate a processor or joint controller, such as a market research company and Joint Industry Committee, to carry out the processing on its behalf.
- Tabled by
- Christian Doleschal
- Group
- EPP
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- IMCO amendments 125–328 to the draft opinion
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 3
420 −Deletion Marina Kaljurand +8S&D · ITRE–LIBE Deletes the recital
[...]Justification
Replaced with recitals 43a-43r tabled as amendments.
- Tabled by
- Marina Kaljurand, Elena Sancho Murillo, Brando Benifei, Birgit Sippel, Alex Agius Saliba, Francisco Assis, Elisabeth Grossmann, Kristian Vigenin, Matjaž Nemec
- Group
- S&D
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44
421 −Deletion João OliveiraThe Left · ITRE–LIBE Deletes the recital
The storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment and the subsequent processing of such data should be regulated under a single legal framework, namely Regulation (EU) 2016/679, where the subscriber of the electronic communications service or the user of the terminal equipment is a natural person. The amendments presented in this Regulation continue to offer the highest levels of protection for personal data, while simplifying the experiences of data subjects in exerting their rights and expressing their choices online. The amendments concern in particular storage of information in that equipment, accessing or otherwise collecting information from that equipment that entails the processing of personal data through cookies or similar technologies to gain information from the terminal equipment. The relevant rules should also apply regardless of whether the terminal equipment is owned by the natural person or by another legal or natural person.- Tabled by
- João Oliveira
- Group
- The Left
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Source
- Official text, page 18
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 1
Show 35 more amendments
422 −Deletion Pernando Barrena Arza +1The Left · ITRE–LIBE Deletes the recital
The storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment and the subsequent processing of such data should be regulated under a single legal framework, namely Regulation (EU) 2016/679, where the subscriber of the electronic communications service or the user of the terminal equipment is a natural person. The amendments presented in this Regulation continue to offer the highest levels of protection for personal data, while simplifying the experiences of data subjects in exerting their rights and expressing their choices online. The amendments concern in particular storage of information in that equipment, accessing or otherwise collecting information from that equipment that entails the processing of personal data through cookies or similar technologies to gain information from the terminal equipment. The relevant rules should also apply regardless of whether the terminal equipment is owned by the natural person or by another legal or natural person.- Tabled by
- Pernando Barrena Arza, João Oliveira
- Group
- The Left
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Source
- Official text, page 19
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 1
423 ~Alternative Julie Rechagneux +7ECR, PfE · ITRE–LIBE “These rules are without prejudice to Directive 2002/58/EC, which continues to apply in full, and in particular to the confidentiality of…”
The storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment and the subsequent processing of such data should be regulated under a single legal framework, namely Regulation (EU) 2016/679, where the subscriber of the electronic communications service or the user of the terminal equipment is a natural person. The amendments presented in this Regulation continue to offer the highest levels of protection for personal data, while simplifying the experiences of data subjects in exerting their rights and expressing their choices online. The amendments concern in particular storage of information in that equipment, accessing or otherwise collecting information from that equipment that entails the processing of personal data through
cookiestrackers, identifiers or similar technologies located on, or interacting with, terminal equipment, including but not limited to cookies to gain information from the terminal equipment. The relevant rules should also apply regardless of whether the terminal equipment is owned by the natural person or by another legal or natural person. These rules are without prejudice to Directive 2002/58/EC, which continues to apply in full, and in particular to the confidentiality of communications and of the related traffic data, the protection of traffic and location data, the safeguards against unsolicited communications, and the possibility for Member States to adopt restrictive measures, as provided for in Articles 5, 6, 9, 13 and 15(1) of that Directive.- Tabled by
- Julie Rechagneux, Mélanie Disdier, Aleksandar Nikolic, Pierre-Romain Thionnet, Alexandre Varaut, Fabrice Leggeri, Marion Maréchal, Christophe Bay
- Group
- ECR, PfE
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 1
424 ~Alternative Sebastian Tynkkynen +1ECR · ITRE–LIBE “The storing of information, or the gaining of access to information already stored, in a terminal equipment and the subsequent processing of such…”
The storing of
personal datainformation, or the gaining of access topersonal datainformation already stored, in a terminal equipment and the subsequent processing of such data should be regulated under a single legal framework, namelyRegulationDirective(EU) 20162002/679, where the subscriber of the electronic communications service or the user of the terminal equipment is a natural person58/EC. The amendments presented in this Regulation should continue to offer the highest levels of protection for personal data, while simplifying the experiences of data subjects in exerting their rights and expressing their choices online. The amendments concern in particular storage of information in that equipment, accessing or otherwise collecting information from that equipment that entails the processing of personal data through cookies or similar technologies to gain information from the terminal equipment.The relevant rules should also apply regardless of whether the terminal equipment is owned by the natural person or by another legal or natural person.- Tabled by
- Sebastian Tynkkynen, Diego Solier
- Group
- ECR
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 1
425 ~Alternative Markéta GregorováGreens/EFA · ITRE–LIBE “amendments presented in this Regulation regarding the”
The amendments presented in this Regulation regarding the storing of
personal data,information or the gaining of access topersonal datainformation already stored,in a terminal equipmentand the subsequent processing of such data should be regulated under a single legal framework, namely Regulation (EU) 2016/679, where the subscriber of the electronic communications service or the user of the terminal equipment is a natural person. The amendments presented in this Regulationcontinue to offer the highest levels of protectionfor personal data, while simplifying the experiences of data subjects in exerting their rights and expressing their choices online. The amendments concern in particular storage of information in that equipment, accessing or otherwise collecting information from that equipment that entails inter alia the processing of personal data or other information through cookies or similar technologies to gain information from the terminal equipment. The relevant rules should also apply regardless of whether the terminal equipment is owned by the natural person or by another legal or natural person.- Tabled by
- Markéta Gregorová on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group
- Group
- Greens/EFA
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 1
426 ~Alternative Diana Iovanovici ŞoşoacăNI · ITRE–LIBE “but they should include potential penalties to be applied in the event of an information leak involving personal data or access by persons who are…”
The storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment and the subsequent processing of such data should be regulated under a single legal framework, namely Regulation (EU) 2016/679, where the subscriber of the electronic communications service or the user of the terminal equipment is a natural person. The amendments presented in this Regulation continue to offer the highest levels of protection for personal data, while simplifying the experiences of data subjects in exerting their rights and expressing their choices online, but they should include potential penalties to be applied in the event of an information leak involving personal data or access by persons who are not authorised to access this personal information and data. The amendments concern in particular storage of information in that equipment, accessing or otherwise collecting information from that equipment that entails the processing of personal data through cookies or similar technologies to gain information from the terminal equipment. The relevant rules should also apply regardless of whether the terminal equipment is owned by the natural person or by another legal or natural person.
- Tabled by
- Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă
- Group
- NI
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 1
427 ~Alternative Irena Joveva +5Renew · ITRE–LIBE “constitutes a highly intrusive interference with the fundamental rights to confidentiality”
The storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment and
theany subsequent processing constitutes a highly intrusive interference with the fundamental rights to confidentiality ofsuchcommunicationsdataand device integrity, and should beregulatedthereforeundersubjectatosinglestrictlegal framework, namely Regulation (EU) 2016/679protections, where the subscriber of the electronic communications service or the user of the terminal equipment is anaturaldatapersonsubject. The amendments presented in this Regulation continue to offer the highest levels of protection for personal data, while simplifying the experiences of data subjects in exerting their rights and expressing their choices online. The amendments concern in particular storage of information in that equipment, accessing or otherwise collecting information from that equipment that entails the processing of personal data through cookies or similar technologies to gain information from the terminal equipment. The relevant rules should also apply regardless of whether the terminal equipment is owned by thenaturaldatapersonsubject or by another legal or natural person.- Tabled by
- Irena Joveva, Michael McNamara, Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle, Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, Fabienne Keller
- Group
- Renew
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 1
428 ~Alternative Markéta GregorováGreens/EFA · ITRE–LIBE “The storing of information, or the gaining of access to information already stored, in a terminal equipment should continue to be allowed only on the…”
The storing of
personal datainformation, or the gaining of access topersonal datainformation already stored, in a terminal equipment should continue to be allowed only on the basis of consent.Similar to the approach in Directive 2002/58/EC, this requirement should not preclude storing of personal data, or gaining of access to personal data already stored, in the terminal equipment of a natural person, when that is based on Union or Member State law within the meaning of Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and if it fulfils all conditions of lawfulness laid down in that provision, and is done for the objectives laid down in Article 23(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.- Tabled by
- Markéta Gregorová on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group
- Group
- Greens/EFA
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Source
- Official text, page 24
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 2
429 ~Alternative Sebastian Tynkkynen +1ECR · ITRE–LIBE “cookies and similar technologies, should continue to be governed by Directive 2002/58/EC. In order to ensure legal certainty, avoid fragmentation and…”
The storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment should continue to be allowed only on the basis of consent. Similar to the approach in Directive 2002/58/EC, this requirement should not preclude storing of personal data, or gaining of access to personal data already stored, in the terminal equipment of a natural person, when that is based on Union or Member State law within the meaning of Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and if it fulfils all conditions of lawfulness laid down in that provision, and is done for the objectives laid down in Article 23(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.The storing of information on, or the gaining of access to information already stored, in the terminal equipment of a natural person, in particular through cookies and similar technologies, should continue to be governed by Directive 2002/58/EC. In order to ensure legal certainty, avoid fragmentation and reduce unnecessary compliance burdens on businesses, a single and coherent regulatory framework should apply to all such practices, irrespective of whether they involve personal or non-personal data. A differentiated regime under which only cookies involving personal data would be subject to Regulation (EU) 2016/679 while others remain under Directive 2002/58/EC would create legal complexity and increase costs for undertakings, in particular small and medium-sized enterprises, without providing additional protection to data subjects. Therefore, the rules on the storing of information and gaining of access to information stored in terminal equipment should remain unified within the framework of Directive 2002/58/EC.- Tabled by
- Sebastian Tynkkynen, Diego Solier
- Group
- ECR
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 2
430 ~Alternative Ana Vasconcelos +1Renew · ITRE–LIBE “provided that any such measure is necessary and proportionate and does not require the general identification of users, nor the weakening of…”
The storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment should continue to be allowed only on the basis of consent. Similar to the approach in Directive 2002/58/EC, this requirement should not preclude storing of personal data, or gaining of access to personal data already stored, in the terminal equipment of a natural person, when that is based on Union or Member State law within the meaning of Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and if it fulfils all conditions of lawfulness laid down in that provision, and is done for the objectives laid down in Article 23(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, provided that any such measure is necessary and proportionate and does not require the general identification of users, nor the weakening of anonymity, encryption or other protective tools on which users, including journalists, activists and other persons at risk, rely.
- Tabled by
- Ana Vasconcelos, João Cotrim De Figueiredo
- Group
- Renew
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 2
431 ~Alternative Pernando Barrena Arza +1The Left · ITRE–LIBE “The storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment should continue to be allowed only on…”
The storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment should continue to be allowed only on the basis of consent.
Similar to the approach in Directive 2002/58/EC, this requirement should not preclude storing of personal data, or gaining of access to personal data already stored, in the terminal equipment of a natural person, when that is based on Union or Member State law within the meaning of Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and if it fulfils all conditions of lawfulness laid down in that provision, and is done for the objectives laid down in Article 23(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.This requirement should not preclude storing of personal data, or gaining of access to personal data already stored, in the terminal equipment of a natural person, under certain conditions.- Tabled by
- Pernando Barrena Arza, João Oliveira
- Group
- The Left
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Source
- Official text, page 26
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 2
432 ~Alternative Diana Iovanovici ŞoşoacăNI · ITRE–LIBE “At the same time, it is important to include potential penalties to be applied in the event of an information leak involving personal data or access…”
The storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment should continue to be allowed only on the basis of consent. Similar to the approach in Directive 2002/58/EC, this requirement should not preclude storing of personal data, or gaining of access to personal data already stored, in the terminal equipment of a natural person, when that is based on Union or Member State law within the meaning of Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and if it fulfils all conditions of lawfulness laid down in that provision, and is done for the objectives laid down in Article 23(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. At the same time, it is important to include potential penalties to be applied in the event of an information leak involving personal data or access by persons who are not authorised to access this personal information and data.
- Tabled by
- Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă
- Group
- NI
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 2
433 ~Alternative Irena Joveva +5Renew · ITRE–LIBE “and subject to the conditions of”
The storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment should continue to be allowed only on the basis of consent. Similar to the approach in Directive 2002/58/EC, this requirement should not preclude storing of personal data, or gaining of access to personal data already stored, in the terminal equipment of a
naturaldatapersonsubject, when that is based on Union or Member State law within the meaning of, and subject to the conditions of, Article 6 (3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and if it fulfils all conditions of lawfulness laid down in that provision, and is done for the objectives laid down in Article 23(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.- Tabled by
- Irena Joveva, Michael McNamara, Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle, Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, Fabienne Keller
- Group
- Renew
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 2
434 ~Alternative Alex Agius SalibaS&D · ITRE–LIBE “under Regulation (EU) 2016/679”
The storing of
personal datainformation, or the gaining of access topersonal datainformation already stored, in a terminal equipment should continue to be allowed only on the basis of consent. Similar to the approach in Directive 2002/58/EC, this requirement under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should not preclude storing of personal data, or gaining of access to personal data already stored, inthea terminal equipmentof a natural person, when that is based on Union or Member State law within the meaning of Article 6(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and if it fulfils all conditions of lawfulness laid down in that provision, and is done for the objectives laid down in Article 23(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.- Tabled by
- Alex Agius Saliba
- Group
- S&D
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Source
- Official text, page 28
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 2
435 ~Alternative Aura Salla +6EPP · ITRE–LIBE “The storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment should continue to be allowed only on…”
The storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment should continue to be allowed only on the basis of consent. Similar to the approach in Directive 2002/58/EC, this requirement should not preclude storing of personal data, or gaining of access to personal data already stored, in the terminal equipment of a natural person, when that is based on Union
or Member Statelaw within the meaning of Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and if it fulfils all conditions of lawfulness laid down in that provision, and is done for the objectives laid down in Article 23(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.- Tabled by
- Aura Salla, Niels Flemming Hansen, Ana Miguel Pedro, Angelika Niebler, Andrea Wechsler, Oliver Schenk, Christian Ehler
- Group
- EPP
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 2
436 −Deletion João OliveiraThe Left · ITRE–LIBE Deletes the recital
With a view to reducing the compliance burden and providing legal clarity to controllers, and given that certain purposes of processing pose a low risk to the rights and freedoms of data subjects or that such processing may be necessary to provide a service requested by the data subject, it is necessary to define a limitative list of purposes for which the processing should be permitted without consent. As regards storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment, and subsequent processing that is necessary for those purposes, this Regulation should therefore provide that the processing is lawful. The controller, such as a media service provider, may mandate a processor, such as a market research company, to carry out the processing on its behalf.- Tabled by
- João Oliveira
- Group
- The Left
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 3
437 −Deletion Pernando Barrena Arza +1The Left · ITRE–LIBE Deletes the recital
With a view to reducing the compliance burden and providing legal clarity to controllers, and given that certain purposes of processing pose a low risk to the rights and freedoms of data subjects or that such processing may be necessary to provide a service requested by the data subject, it is necessary to define a limitative list of purposes for which the processing should be permitted without consent. As regards storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment, and subsequent processing that is necessary for those purposes, this Regulation should therefore provide that the processing is lawful. The controller, such as a media service provider, may mandate a processor, such as a market research company, to carry out the processing on its behalf.- Tabled by
- Pernando Barrena Arza, João Oliveira
- Group
- The Left
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Source
- Official text, page 30
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 3
438 ~Alternative Sebastian Tynkkynen +1ECR · ITRE–LIBE “Such exceptions should cover the transmission of electronic communications, the provision of a service explicitly requested by the user including its…”
With a view to increase innovation and competitiveness, reducing the compliance burden and providing legal clarity to
controllersall stakeholders, and given that certain purposes of processing pose a low risk to the rights and freedoms of data subjects or that such processing may be necessary to provide, among other things, a safe and functional service requested by thedatasubscribersubjector user, it is necessary to define a limitative list of purposes for which the processing should be permitted without consent. As regards storing ofpersonal datainformation, or the gaining of access topersonal datainformation already stored, in a terminal equipment, and subsequent processing that is necessary for those purposes, this Regulation should therefore provide that the processing is lawful. The controller, such as a media service provider, may mandate a processor, such as a market research company, to carry out the processing on its behalf. Such exceptions should cover the transmission of electronic communications, the provision of a service explicitly requested by the user including its functionality and personalisation, audience measurement limited to aggregated data without repurposing for profiling or advertising, and joint audience measurement involving media service providers or their mandated entities. Exceptions should further include measures strictly necessary to ensure the security of the service or network and to prevent fraud directly related to the requested service, as well as the provision, display and measurement of contextual advertising based solely on the content immediately presented to the user, without any profiling. In recognition of the important role played by media service providers and the low privacy risk associated with their typical processing activities, specific provisions should also allow them to offer users a clear choice between consenting to the processing of personal data for purposes such as advertising, service improvement, product development and analytics, or paying a reasonable fee for an equivalent version of the service without such processing. In all cases, these exceptions are designed to strike an appropriate balance between the protection of users’ rights, the sustainability of media pluralism, and the need to foster innovation and competitiveness in the digital single market.- Tabled by
- Sebastian Tynkkynen, Diego Solier
- Group
- ECR
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 3
439 ~Alternative Aura Salla +8EPP · ITRE–LIBE “This list should include measuring the audience of an online service by creating aggregated information about the usage of an online service, where…”
With a view to reducing the compliance burden and providing legal clarity to controllers, and given that certain purposes of processing pose a low risk to the rights and freedoms of data subjects or that such processing may be necessary to provide a service requested by the data subject, it is necessary to define a limitative list of purposes for which the processing should be permitted without consent. This list should include measuring the audience of an online service by creating aggregated information about the usage of an online service, where it is carried out by the provider of that online service, or by a third party, such as a market research company or a Joint Industry Committee, acting together with or on behalf of this provider. ‘Audience measurement’ should be understood in accordance with Article 2(16) and with Article 24(1) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1083. Gatekeepers designated under Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 carrying out audience measurement may not rely on article 88a(3)c of this Regulation. As regards storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment, and subsequent processing that is necessary for those purposes, this Regulation should therefore provide that the processing is lawful. The controller, such as a media service provider, may mandate a processor, such as a market research company, to carry out the processing on its behalf.
- Tabled by
- Aura Salla, Niels Flemming Hansen, Ana Miguel Pedro, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Angelika Niebler, Andrea Wechsler, Oliver Schenk, Pekka Toveri, Christian Ehler
- Group
- EPP
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 3
440 ~Alternative Irena Joveva +5Renew · ITRE–LIBE “These narrow exceptions should strictly apply to technical communications transmission, the execution of explicit services requested by the data…”
With a view to reducing the compliance burden and providing legal clarity to controllers, and given that certain purposes of processing pose a low risk to the rights and freedoms of data subjects or that such processing may be necessary to provide a service requested by the data subject, it is necessary to define a limitative list of purposes for which the processing should be permitted without consent. As regards storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment, and subsequent processing that is strictly necessary for those specific purposes, this Regulation should therefore provide that the processing is lawful.
The controller, such as a media service provider, may mandate a processor, such as a market research company, to carry out the processing on its behalf.These narrow exceptions should strictly apply to technical communications transmission, the execution of explicit services requested by the data subject, necessary security operations, or audience measurement metrics for media service providers, or third-party providers of audience measurement for media services providers, provided it follows conditions for low processing risks, namely for statistical counting and is not utilised for profiling of data subject and does not involve core platfroms services as defined in Regulation (EU) 2022/1925. Following these conditions, the controller, such as a media service provider, may therefore mandate a processor, such as a market research company, to carry out the processing on its behalf.- Tabled by
- Irena Joveva, Michael McNamara, Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle, Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, Fabienne Keller
- Group
- Renew
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 3
441 ~Alternative Wouter BekeEPP · ITRE–LIBE “subject to strict safeguards ensuring that such processing is proportionate, compliant with the requirements of Article 24(1) of Regulation (EU)…”
With a view to reducing the compliance burden and providing legal clarity to controllers, and given that certain purposes of processing pose a low risk to the rights and freedoms of data subjects or that such processing may be necessary to provide a service requested by the data subject, it is necessary to define a limitative list of purposes for which the processing should be permitted without consent. As regards storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment, and subsequent processing that is necessary for those purposes, this Regulation should therefore provide that the processing is lawful. The controller, such as an online service or a media service provider, may mandate a processor or joint controller, such as a market research company or Joint Industry Committee, to carry out the processing jointly or on its behalf, subject to strict safeguards ensuring that such processing is proportionate, compliant with the requirements of Article 24(1) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1083 and is not repurposed for advertising, profiling, or other unrelated purposes.
Justification
This amendment ensures consistency with Article 5.3(c) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 by clarifying that audience measurement may be conducted by mandated joint controllers, including Joint Industry Committees and research companies. It aligns the recital with the EMFA framework, strengthening legal certainty, independent measurement and safeguards against profiling or advertising purposes.
- Tabled by
- Wouter Beke
- Group
- EPP
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 3
442 ~Alternative Markéta GregorováGreens/EFA · ITRE–LIBE “service providers fulfill certain conditions. In the case of audience measurement, the data should be instantly anonymised and aggregated. The user’s…”
With a view to reducing the compliance burden and providing legal clarity
to controllers, and given that certain purposes ofprocessingstoringposeor gaining access to the information on the terminal equipment of a natural person poses a low risk to the rights and freedoms of data subjects or thatsuch processingit may be necessary to provide a service requested by the data subject, it is necessary to define a limitative list of purposes for which the processing should be permitted without consent.As regards storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment, and subsequent processing that is necessary for those purposes, this Regulation should therefore provide that the processing is lawful.This limited list of low risk operations includes audience measurement, especially in the case of media providers, and the restoration or maintenance of the security of the terminal equipment, provided that service providers fulfill certain conditions. In the case of audience measurement, the data should be instantly anonymised and aggregated. The user’s personal data could, for instance, be retained for a short time session. At the end of the session, the data would be aggregated in such a way that it does not constitute personal data and remaining personal data from the session is deleted or anonymised. The user should still be informed about the storing or gaining access. All of these operations should always be strictly technically and solely necessary for the purpose.The controller, such as a media service provider, may mandate a processor, such as a market research company, to carry out the processing on its behalf.- Tabled by
- Markéta Gregorová on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group
- Group
- Greens/EFA
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 3
443 ~Alternative Ana Vasconcelos +1Renew · ITRE–LIBE “Those purposes should be interpreted narrowly and should not serve as a basis for tracking, profiling or the large-scale monitoring of the online…”
With a view to reducing the compliance burden and providing legal clarity to controllers, and given that certain purposes of processing pose a low risk to the rights and freedoms of data subjects or that such processing may be necessary to provide a service requested by the data subject, it is necessary to define a limitative list of purposes for which the processing should be permitted without consent. As regards storing of personal data, or the gaining of access to personal data already stored, in a terminal equipment, and subsequent processing that is necessary for those purposes, this Regulation should therefore provide that the processing is lawful. Those purposes should be interpreted narrowly and should not serve as a basis for tracking, profiling or the large-scale monitoring of the online activity of data subjects. The controller, such as a media service provider, may mandate a processor, such as a market research company, to carry out the processing on its behalf.
- Tabled by
- Ana Vasconcelos, João Cotrim De Figueiredo
- Group
- Renew
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Source
- Official text, page 36
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 3
444 −Deletion João OliveiraThe Left · ITRE–LIBE Deletes the recital
For the subsequent processing of personal data for other purpose than those defined in the limitative list, Article 6 and, where relevant, Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be applied. It is the responsibility of the controller in the light of the principle of accountability to choose the appropriate legal basis for the intended processing. In order to be able to rely on legitimate interest under Article 6(1), point f, of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 as a ground for the subsequent processing of personal data, the controller must show that it pursues the controller’s or third parties’ legitimate interest, the processing is necessary in order to achieve the purpose of that legitimate interest, and the interests or fundamental rights of the data subject do not override the interests pursued by the controller. In this context, controllers should take outmost account of the following elements: whether the data subject is a child; the reasonable expectations of data subject; the impact on the individual either because of the scale of data processed or the sensitivity of the data processed; the scale of the processing at issue in the sense that the processing cannot be particularly extensive either because of their amount or the range of categories of data; the processing should be based on data limited to what is necessary and cannot be based on monitoring of large parts of the online activity of the data subjects; and other relevant factors as appropriate. The processing should not give rise to the continuous monitoring of the data subject’s private life.- Tabled by
- João Oliveira
- Group
- The Left
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 4
445 −Deletion Pernando Barrena Arza +1The Left · ITRE–LIBE Deletes the recital
For the subsequent processing of personal data for other purpose than those defined in the limitative list, Article 6 and, where relevant, Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be applied. It is the responsibility of the controller in the light of the principle of accountability to choose the appropriate legal basis for the intended processing. In order to be able to rely on legitimate interest under Article 6(1), point f, of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 as a ground for the subsequent processing of personal data, the controller must show that it pursues the controller’s or third parties’ legitimate interest, the processing is necessary in order to achieve the purpose of that legitimate interest, and the interests or fundamental rights of the data subject do not override the interests pursued by the controller. In this context, controllers should take outmost account of the following elements: whether the data subject is a child; the reasonable expectations of data subject; the impact on the individual either because of the scale of data processed or the sensitivity of the data processed; the scale of the processing at issue in the sense that the processing cannot be particularly extensive either because of their amount or the range of categories of data; the processing should be based on data limited to what is necessary and cannot be based on monitoring of large parts of the online activity of the data subjects; and other relevant factors as appropriate. The processing should not give rise to the continuous monitoring of the data subject’s private life.- Tabled by
- Pernando Barrena Arza, João Oliveira
- Group
- The Left
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 4
446 −Deletion Alex Agius SalibaS&D · ITRE–LIBE Deletes the recital
For the subsequent processing of personal data for other purpose than those defined in the limitative list, Article 6 and, where relevant, Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be applied. It is the responsibility of the controller in the light of the principle of accountability to choose the appropriate legal basis for the intended processing. In order to be able to rely on legitimate interest under Article 6(1), point f, of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 as a ground for the subsequent processing of personal data, the controller must show that it pursues the controller’s or third parties’ legitimate interest, the processing is necessary in order to achieve the purpose of that legitimate interest, and the interests or fundamental rights of the data subject do not override the interests pursued by the controller. In this context, controllers should take outmost account of the following elements: whether the data subject is a child; the reasonable expectations of data subject; the impact on the individual either because of the scale of data processed or the sensitivity of the data processed; the scale of the processing at issue in the sense that the processing cannot be particularly extensive either because of their amount or the range of categories of data; the processing should be based on data limited to what is necessary and cannot be based on monitoring of large parts of the online activity of the data subjects; and other relevant factors as appropriate. The processing should not give rise to the continuous monitoring of the data subject’s private life.- Tabled by
- Alex Agius Saliba
- Group
- S&D
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Source
- Official text, page 39
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 4
447 ~Alternative Markéta GregorováGreens/EFA · ITRE–LIBE “For the subsequent processing of personal data Article 6 and, where relevant, Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be applied. It is the…”
For the subsequent processing of personal data
for other purpose than those defined in the limitative list,Article 6 and, where relevant, Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be applied. It is the responsibility of the controller in the light of the principle of accountability to choose the appropriate legal basis for the intended processing.In order to be able to rely on legitimate interest under Article 6(1), point f, of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 as a ground for the subsequent processing of personal data, the controller must show that it pursues the controller’s or third parties’ legitimate interest, the processing is necessary in order to achieve the purpose of that legitimate interest, and the interests or fundamental rights of the data subject do not override the interests pursued by the controller. In this context, controllers should take outmost account of the following elements: whether the data subject is a child; the reasonable expectations of data subject; the impact on the individual either because of the scale of data processed or the sensitivity of the data processed; the scale of the processing at issue in the sense that the processing cannot be particularly extensive either because of their amount or the range of categories of data; the processing should be based on data limited to what is necessary and cannot be based on monitoring of large parts of the online activity of the data subjects; and other relevant factors as appropriate. The processing should not give rise to the continuous monitoring of the data subject’s private life.- Tabled by
- Markéta Gregorová on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group
- Group
- Greens/EFA
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 4
448 ~Alternative Irena Joveva +5Renew · ITRE–LIBE “However, to ensure that such processing does not override the fundamental rights and freedoms of data subjects, controllers must implement mandatory…”
For the subsequent processing of personal data for other purpose than those defined in the limitative list, Article 6 and, where relevant, Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be applied.For the subsequent processing of personal data for other purpose than those defined in the limitative list, such as development and operating of artificial intelligence models, controllers may seek to rely on legitimate interest under Article 6 (1), point (f) while Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should nevertheless be applied. However, to ensure that such processing does not override the fundamental rights and freedoms of data subjects, controllers must implement mandatory checklist of technical and organisational standards. These must include providing data subjects with an absolute right to object after being fully informed, ensuring state-of-the-art technics for data anonymisation, the executing rigorous technical abstration during the model training phase to make data disclosure extremely unlikely. To reduce individual administrative burdens, Member States should enable data subjects to administer their absolute right to object through a centralised public body. To ease complience and ensure uniformed approach, minimum standards for these techniques should be technically defined through standardisation. It is the responsibility of the controller in the light of the principle of accountability to choose the appropriate legal basis for the intended processing. In order to be able to rely on legitimate interest under Article 6(1), point f, of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 as a ground for the subsequent processing of personal data, the controller must show that it pursues the controller’s or third parties’ legitimate interest, the processing is necessary in order to achieve the purpose of that legitimate interest, and the interests or fundamental rights of the data subject do not override the interests pursued by the controller. In this context, controllers should takeoutmostutmost account of the following elements: whether the data subject is a child; the reasonable expectations of the data subject; the impact on the individual either because of the scale of data processed or the sensitivity of the data processed; the scale of the processing at issue in the sense that the processing cannot be particularly extensive either because of their amount or the range of categories of data; the processing should be based on data limited to what is necessary and cannot be based on monitoring of large parts of the online activity of the data subjects; and other relevant factors as appropriate. The processing should not give rise to the continuous monitoring of the data subject’s private life.- Tabled by
- Irena Joveva, Michael McNamara, Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle, Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, Fabienne Keller
- Group
- Renew
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 4
449 ~Alternative Diana Iovanovici ŞoşoacăNI · ITRE–LIBE “and there should also be potential penalties in the event of information misuse or leaks involving personal data or access by persons who are not…”
For the subsequent processing of personal data for other purpose than those defined in the limitative list, Article 6 and, where relevant, Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be applied. It is the responsibility of the controller in the light of the principle of accountability to choose the appropriate legal basis for the intended processing. In order to be able to rely on legitimate interest under Article 6(1), point f, of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 as a ground for the subsequent processing of personal data, the controller must show that it pursues the controller’s or third parties’ legitimate interest, the processing is necessary in order to achieve the purpose of that legitimate interest, and the interests or fundamental rights of the data subject do not override the interests pursued by the controller. In this context, controllers should take outmost account of the following elements: whether the data subject is a child; the reasonable expectations of data subject; the impact on the individual either because of the scale of data processed or the sensitivity of the data processed; the scale of the processing at issue in the sense that the processing cannot be particularly extensive either because of their amount or the range of categories of data; the processing should be based on data limited to what is necessary and cannot be based on monitoring of large parts of the online activity of the data subjects; and other relevant factors as appropriate. The processing should not give rise to the continuous monitoring of the data subject’s private life, and there should also be potential penalties in the event of information misuse or leaks involving personal data or access by persons who are not authorised to access this personal information and data.
- Tabled by
- Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă
- Group
- NI
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 4
450 ~Alternative Sebastian Tynkkynen +1ECR · ITRE–LIBE “Sensitive categories of personal data shoud only be processed in accordance with Article 9 of Regulation 2016/679, unless otherwise provided for in…”
For the subsequent processing of personal data for other purpose than those defined in the limitative list, Article 6 and, where relevant, Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be applied. It is the responsibility of the controller in the light of the principle of accountability to choose the appropriate legal basis for the intended processing. In order to be able to rely on legitimate interest under Article 6(1), point f, of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 as a ground for the subsequent processing of personal data, the controller must show that it pursues the controller’s or third parties’ legitimate interest, the processing is necessary in order to achieve the purpose of that legitimate interest, and the interests or fundamental rights of the data subject do not override the interests pursued by the controller. In this context, controllers should take outmost account of the following elements
:; whether the data subject is a child; the reasonable expectations of data subject; the impact on the individual either because of the scale of data processed or the sensitivity of the data processed; the scale of the processing at issue in the sense that the processing cannot be particularly extensive either because of their amount or the range of categories of data; the processing should be based on data limited to what is necessary and cannot be based on monitoring of large parts of the online activity of the data subjects; and other relevant factors as appropriate. The processing should not give rise to thecontinuousmonitoring of the data subject’s private life. Sensitive categories of personal data shoud only be processed in accordance with Article 9 of Regulation 2016/679, unless otherwise provided for in this regulation.- Tabled by
- Sebastian Tynkkynen, Diego Solier
- Group
- ECR
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 4
451 ~Alternative Ana Vasconcelos +1Renew · ITRE–LIBE “Where age assurance is necessary, it should rely on privacy-preserving and data-minimising techniques, and should not undermine the anonymity or…”
For the subsequent processing of personal data for other purpose than those defined in the limitative list, Article 6 and, where relevant, Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be applied. It is the responsibility of the controller in the light of the principle of accountability to choose the appropriate legal basis for the intended processing. In order to be able to rely on legitimate interest under Article 6(1), point f, of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 as a ground for the subsequent processing of personal data, the controller must show that it pursues the controller’s or third parties’ legitimate interest, the processing is necessary in order to achieve the purpose of that legitimate interest, and the interests or fundamental rights of the data subject do not override the interests pursued by the controller. In this context, controllers should take outmost account of the following elements: whether the data subject is a child; the reasonable expectations of data subject; the impact on the individual either because of the scale of data processed or the sensitivity of the data processed; the scale of the processing at issue in the sense that the processing cannot be particularly extensive either because of their amount or the range of categories of data; the processing should be based on data limited to what is necessary and cannot be based on monitoring of large parts of the online activity of the data subjects; and other relevant factors as appropriate. The processing should not give rise to the continuous monitoring of the data subject’s private life. Where age assurance is necessary, it should rely on privacy-preserving and data-minimising techniques, and should not undermine the anonymity or confidentiality of communications.
- Tabled by
- Ana Vasconcelos, João Cotrim De Figueiredo
- Group
- Renew
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 4
452 −Deletion João OliveiraThe Left · ITRE–LIBE Deletes the recital
Where the controller cannot rely on legitimate interest as a legal ground for the subsequent processing, the processing should be based on another ground in Article 6(1), in particular on consent in accordance with Articles 6 and 7 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, provided that all principles of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 are met.- Tabled by
- João Oliveira
- Group
- The Left
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 5
453 −Deletion Sebastian Tynkkynen +1ECR · ITRE–LIBE Deletes the recital
Where the controller cannot rely on legitimate interest as a legal ground for the subsequent processing, the processing should be based on another ground in Article 6(1), in particular on consent in accordance with Articles 6 and 7 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, provided that all principles of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 are met.- Tabled by
- Sebastian Tynkkynen, Diego Solier
- Group
- ECR
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Source
- Official text, page 46
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 5
454 −Deletion Pernando Barrena Arza +1The Left · ITRE–LIBE Deletes the recital
Where the controller cannot rely on legitimate interest as a legal ground for the subsequent processing, the processing should be based on another ground in Article 6(1), in particular on consent in accordance with Articles 6 and 7 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, provided that all principles of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 are met.- Tabled by
- Pernando Barrena Arza, João Oliveira
- Group
- The Left
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 5
455 −Deletion Alex Agius SalibaS&D · ITRE–LIBE Deletes the recital
Where the controller cannot rely on legitimate interest as a legal ground for the subsequent processing, the processing should be based on another ground in Article 6(1), in particular on consent in accordance with Articles 6 and 7 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, provided that all principles of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 are met.- Tabled by
- Alex Agius Saliba
- Group
- S&D
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Source
- Official text, page 47
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 5
456 −Deletion Markéta GregorováGreens/EFA · ITRE–LIBE Deletes the recital
Where the controller cannot rely on legitimate interest as a legal ground for the subsequent processing, the processing should be based on another ground in Article 6(1), in particular on consent in accordance with Articles 6 and 7 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, provided that all principles of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 are met.- Tabled by
- Markéta Gregorová on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group
- Group
- Greens/EFA
- Targets
- Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 44
- Document
- ITRE–LIBE amendments 401–526 to the draft report
- Printed header
- Recital 44 – paragraph 5