Hi does anyone have thoughts or have seen analysis on the clearview case (link below), how that might have played out by a EU supervisory authority? Would they have reached same conclusions, and would the fine have been the same?
https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/news-and-events/news-and-blogs/2021/11/ico-issues-provisional-view-to-fine-clearview-ai-inc-over-17-million/
DP-Pro
The ICO had to announce its provisional intent to impose the £17m fine due to stock market disclosure regulations. It remains to be seen whether that number stays of falls (cf Marriott and BA). I agree with the view that it was unlawful. Generally, a person publishes a post to social media for a personal/domestic purpose, possibly expecting to engage or annoy others. A commercial enterprise, be it Clearview or another, cannot rely on that same domestic purpose. They will be using it for monetary or other purposes, mostly under legitimate interests which is a) not compatible with the original purpose for posting and b) unlawful because the individual was not informed of the collection and sue, nor allowed to object. As this goes to the heart of DS Rights an upper tier fins is appropriate. Also, there is a huge distinction between something that is ‘publicly available’ / made public and the term ‘in the public domain’, and the former does not mean its ‘up for grabs’!