Teikėjai, kurie savo tekste tiesiogiai nurodė būtent šį straipsnio numerį. Tai citata iš jų pačių teksto — ne mūsų vertinimas ir ne priežastinis ryšys.
| Kas | Šalis | Ką parašė |
|---|---|---|
| German Insurance Association | DE | finalized. The restriction of the possibility of consent by the data subject limits the self-determination expressly regulated by Art. 49 GDPR to give this consent. Art. 8 ECHR already sets clear limits for such a restriction of the data subject. c. Are there ↗ |
| MyData-TRUST | BE | both organizations would reap huge benefits from such assurance. With regards to derogations, those within Art. 49 GDPR are last resort options only to be used when there is no adequacy decision and appropriate safeguards cannot be established Guidelines issu ↗ |
| The Information Technology Industry Council (ITI) | US | and the streamlining of approval processes under Articles 40-43 GDPR to encourage their widespread adoption. 6 Article 49 Derogations EDPB Guidelines 2/2018 on derogations of Article 49 GDPR1 introduce an overly strict interpretation of “occasional and not rep ↗ |
| ICANN Business Constituency | US | for the purpose of establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims is considered a lawful basis of processing, consistent with Article 49(e). Conclusion We respecƞully submit that while GDPR has many lasƟng good effects, its impact on WHOIS, overall, has bee ↗ |
| Coalition for Online Accountability | US | for the purpose of establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims is considered a lawful basis of processing, consistent with Article 49(e). CONCLUSION We respectfully submit that issuing the above clarifications will serve to further promote the objective ↗ |
| Creativity Works! | BE | for the purpose of establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims is considered a lawful basis of processing, consistent with Article 49(e). Therefore, we urge European authorities to carefully assess the negative consequences of an impenetrable WHOIS data ↗ |
| Insurance Europe | BE | een limited due to the high requirements imposed by the EDPB and long and complex approval processes. Derogations provided for in Art. 49 GDPR should also not be interpreted too narrowly. Barriers to new technologies 2 4 • The EC, as the guardian of European ↗ |
| Federation of Austrian Industries | AT | irmatively saying they also use an intragroup EU SCCs, which are similar to BCRs, in exceptional cases also consents in line with Art 49 GDPR – here the information obligations regarding the risks are challenging. Another answered they use Binding Corporate Ru ↗ |
| International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories (ISBER) | US | a, as anonymized in the hands of that holder and (2) to add processing necessary for research as an express public interest under Article 49, permitting transfer of data to a jurisdiction lacking a European Commission adequacy decision, provided that such tran ↗ |
| Ecommerce Europe | BE | members also reported that Art. 49 (1) (b) is predominantly interpreted very narrowly by the DPAs of the Member States. Following this strict interpretation, a data transfer out of the EU should only be permitted on this basis if the contractual relationship m ↗ |
| Global Alliance for Genomics and Health | CA | ivacy regime, and to adopt adequacy arrangements that can cover more entities who are processing personal data. Derogations under Article 49 Explicit consent may be used as a legal mechanism for international personal data transfers under Article 49(1)(a). ↗ |
| Multi-Regional Clinical Trials Center of Harvard University and Brigham and Women’s Hospital | US | t or “important reasons of public interest” as a condition for transfer arises under the EDPB Guidelines 2/2018 on derogations of Article 49 under Regulation 2016/679 (the “Guidelines”). ↗ |
| — | (Art. 23.1(e)), “important grounds of public interest” (Art. 28.3(a)), “important reasons of public interest” (Art. 49.1(d)/49.5) and “reasons of substantial public interest” (Art. 9.2(g)). - Transfer of personal data aimed in Chapter V of the GDPR. It is real ↗ | |
| EFPIA | GB | e 95/46/EC and Art. 45 GDPR. xxii Id. Art. 26(2) Directive 95/46/EC and Art. 46 GDPR. xxiii Id. Art. 26(1) Directive 95/46/EC and Art. 49 GDPR. xxiv Id. Art. 25(2) Directive 95/46/EC and Art. 45 GDPR. xxv http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELE ↗ |
| Sky | GB | ecision or possessing its own bespoke transfer mechanism (e.g. Privacy Shield). Aside from the limited exceptions available under Article 49 GDPR, the only obvious option, therefore, would be for an organisation to submit a set of data protection clauses to a ↗ |
Šaltinis: viešų konsultacijų atsiliepimai ir pozicijų dokumentai. n = 15 paminėjimų; skaičiuojama pažodinė nuoroda į straipsnio numerį.