04.17.21

Gemini version available ♊︎

Breaking News: EDPS Admits That It is Powerless to Investigate Claims of GDPR Non-compliance at the EPO

Posted in Deception, Europe, Microsoft, Patents at 1:06 pm by Guest Editorial Team

Nothing says 'European data protection' like outsourcing communications to an American surveillance firm

Summary: Nobody is truly in charge at the EDPS (and in Europe at large); they say EPO is “company” and all one can do is kindly ask the EPO itself to obey the law and stop outsourcing European data to American military contractors

Back in March, Techrights started publishing its exposé about the EPO's sell-out of its digital sovereignty to Microsoft.

At around the same time this matter was brought to the attention of the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS).

“Its primary objective is to ensure that European institutions and bodies respect the right to privacy and data protection when they process personal data and develop new policies.”The EDPS is an independent supervisory authority established by the European Union. Its primary objective is to ensure that European institutions and bodies respect the right to privacy and data protection when they process personal data and develop new policies.

You might have thought that the EDPS would be interested to learn about the alleged GDPR non-compliance at an intergovernmental institution which processes large amounts of personal data relating to EU citizens. You might even have expected them to carry out some kind of independent investigation like the Bavarian Data Protection Commissioner did back in 2015.

But sadly it turns out to be another case of “Not My Department”.

“You might have thought that the EDPS would be interested to learn about the alleged GDPR non-compliance at an intergovernmental institution which processes large amounts of personal data relating to EU citizens.”In its response to the complaint filed about the EPO, the EDPS has now stated that it is powerless to investigate claims of GDPR non-compliance at the second largest European intergovernmental institution.

Instead it suggests to the complainants that they “could contact EPO directly [...] by sending an email to DPO@epo.org”.

The EDPS adds: “You can find this information in the company’s Privacy Policy, available here: EPO – Data protection & privacy.” (warning: epo.org link)

So as far as the EDPS is concerned, the EPO is a “company” rather than a public intergovernmental institution?

“So as far as the EDPS is concerned, the EPO is a “company” rather than a public intergovernmental institution?”Surely this is beyond a joke…

If EU citizens have a problem with the EPO’s failure to comply with GDPR, the only available solution is to complain to the EPO?

And that is going to fix things?

Sounds like somebody in Brussels needs a reality check… URGENTLY!!!

Here’s the text of the letter:

Our ref.: ██████████████

From: European Data Protection Supervisor

To: █████████████████

Date: Friday, April 16, 2021

Dear ███████████████

We are writing in response to your complaint submitted to the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) on 11 March 2021.

We would like to point out that the EDPS is the independent authority of the European Union (EU) that deals with the supervision of the processing of personal data done by EU institutions and bodies[1]. In this sense, our tasks are similar to the tasks of national data protection authorities in the EU Member States, but apply only at the level of the European Union and its institutions[2].

We have analysed the matter raised in your message, and it appears that your request does not relate to the processing of personal data by EU institutions or bodies.

The EDPS has no supervisory competence over other international organisations. In consequence, we regret to inform you that your complaint, regardless its possible merits, falls outside the jurisdiction of the EDPS and we therefore do not have any authority to investigate it.

Please be informed that the seat agreements that the international organisations have with their host states usually grant them certain privileges and immunities. These often exclude the application of national law to the international organisation and therefore, the national data protection authority (DPA) of its host state may not be able to assist you either.

However, please be advised that you could contact EPO directly regarding your complaint by sending an email to DPO@epo.org. You can find this information in the company’s Privacy Policy, available here: EPO – Data protection & privacy.

Yours sincerely,


EDPS Secretariat

| Tel. (+32) 228 31900 | Fax +32(0)22831950 | ›
Email edps@edps.europa.eu
European Data Protection Supervisor
Postal address: Rue Wiertz 60, B-1047 Brussels
Office address: Rue Montoyer 30, B-1000 Brussels
@EU_EDPS www.edps.europa.eu

This email (and any attachment) may contain information that is internal or confidential. Unauthorised access, use or other processing is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient please inform the sender by reply and then delete all copies. Emails are not secure as they can be intercepted, amended, and infected with viruses. The EDPS therefore cannot guarantee the security of correspondence by email.

[1] According to Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 (see https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32018R1725 ‘… the European Data Protection Supervisor, shall monitor the application of the provisions of this Regulation to all processing operations carried out by a Union institution or body…’ (see Article 1(3)). According to Article 3(10), the ‘Union institutions and bodies’ are the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies set up by, or on the basis of, the TEU, the TFEU or the Euratom Treaty (see http://europa.eu/about-eu/institutions-bodies/index_en.htm for a full list).

2 For example, like national data protection authorities we also provide advice to the legislator on new legislative proposals and on initiatives having an impact on data protection and privacy.


Data Protection Notice

According to Articles 15 and 16 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies and on the free movement of such data, please be informed that your personal data will be processed by the EDPS, where proportionate and necessary, for the purpose of investigating your complaint. The legal basis for this processing operation is Article 57(1)(e) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725. The data processed will have been submitted by you, or from other sources during the inquiry of your complaint, and this may include sensitive data. Your data will only be transferred to other EU institutions and bodies or to third parties when it is necessary to ensure the appropriate investigation or follow up of your complaint. Your data will be stored by the EDPS in electronic and paper files for up to ten years (five years for prima facie inadmissible complaints) after the case closure, unless legal proceedings require us to keep them for a longer period. You have the right to access your personal data held by the EDPS and to obtain the rectification thereof, if necessary. Any such request should be addressed to the EDPS at edps@edps.europa.eu. Your data might be transferred to other EU institutions and bodies or to any third parties only where necessary to ensure the appropriate handling of your request. You may also contact the data protection officer of the EDPS (EDPS-DPO@edps.europa.eu), if you have any remarks or complaints regarding the way we process your personal data. You can find the full version of our data protection notice on complaint handling at: https://edps.europa.eu/data-protection/our-role-supervisor/complaints-handling-data-protection-notice_en.

___________________________
[1] According to Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 (see https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32018R1725 ‘… the European Data Protection Supervisor, shall monitor the application of the provisions of this Regulation to all processing operations carried out by a Community institution or body…’ (see Article 1(2)). According to paragraph 1 of the same article, the ‘Community institutions or bodies’ are the institutions and bodies set up by, or on the basis of, the Treaties establishing the European Communities (see http://europa.eu/about-
eu/institutions-bodies/index_en.htm for a full list).
[2] For example, like national data protection authorities we also provide advice to the legislator on new legislative proposals and on initiatives having an impact on data protection and privacy.

Notice the mistakes with the footnotes, the repetition, the odd formatting etc. A rushed job? Did they properly investigate the complaint at all? Or did they look for excuses to dismiss it upfront? Did they use a template that refers to the subject as “company” or do they seriously think EPO is now a for-profit corporation? And if so, are corporations above the law and above the state? Here’s the original [PDF] FWIW.

Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Reddit
  • email

Decor ᶃ Gemini Space

Below is a Web proxy. We recommend getting a Gemini client/browser.

Black/white/grey bullet button This post is also available in Gemini over at this address (requires a Gemini client/browser to open).

Decor ✐ Cross-references

Black/white/grey bullet button Pages that cross-reference this one, if any exist, are listed below or will be listed below over time.

Decor ▢ Respond and Discuss

Black/white/grey bullet button If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

DecorWhat Else is New


  1. Sirius Not-So-‘Open Source’: Cannot Talk to Colleagues, Cannot Speak About Work

    Cover-up and lies became a corporate pattern at the company where I had worked since 2011; it was time to go in order to avoid cooperation in unethical activities



  2. [Meme] Guilt by Association

    Sirius ‘Open Source’ has a history of hostility towards people with disabilities; the company got sued over this, but kept the lawsuit secret



  3. That Time Sirius 'Open Source' Fired a Blind Lady While Gagging Sympathetic Staff

    Sirius 'Open Source' was taken to court after it had wrongly fired a couple of employees, one of whom was blind; this was accompanied by lies about why the staff's communication server was shut down



  4. Links 05/12/2022: Gnoppix Linux 22.12 and Armbian 22.11

    Links for the day



  5. Unified Patent Court (UPC) is “Real Soon Now!” Since 2014

    The Unified Patent Court (UPC) lobby is once again forced to admit issues and delays; we've seen this time and time again for nearly a decade already



  6. Unified Patent Court (UPC) 'Delayed' Again, As Usual, as Unitary Patent Boosters Caught Up in Lies and Scandals

    “UPC [is] delayed by 2 months,” a source has told us, dubbing it “good news” and reaffirming what we’ve said this past year; this litigation lobby's 'wishlist' system isn’t legal, it’s not ready, there are yet more scandals, and journalists have been catching up with these scandals



  7. Links 05/12/2022: GStreamer 1.21.3

    Links for the day



  8. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, December 04, 2022

    IRC logs for Sunday, December 04, 2022



  9. Links 04/12/2022: Status of the 15-Minute Bug Initiative

    Links for the day



  10. When a Company Simply Refuses to Talk to Technical and Exerienced Staff Through Internal Avenues

    When companies behave like monarchies where staff has no role at all in decision-making and decisions are made in violation of those companies’ tenets (or mission statements) it is inevitable that staff will issue concerns, first internally and — failing that — in other channels



  11. [Meme] Kings Instead of Open Consultation Among Peers

    In Sirius there’s no room for debate, even among half a dozen or so technical colleagues; decisions are made in the dark by a tightly-knit cabal (with rather childish superhero cartoons as their avatars) and then imposed on everybody else (hardly democratic, not sane)



  12. Sirius Open Source: The Home of Stress and Bullying by Management

    Part 3 of a report regarding Sirius Open Source, which is imploding after bad judgement and misuse of power against employees



  13. Links 04/12/2022: Fosshost Shudown and OpenIndiana Hipster 2022.10

    Links for the day



  14. Links 03/12/2022: pgAdmin 4 Version 6.17

    Links for the day



  15. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, December 03, 2022

    IRC logs for Saturday, December 03, 2022



  16. Office Manager in Company Without an Office

    Imagine having an “Office Manager” in a company that does not even have an office. Welcome to corporate posturing.



  17. Dishonest Companies Disguised as 'Open Source' (After Abandoning It)

    A deeper look at the way Sirius Open Source presents itself to the public (including prospective and existing clients); This is clearly not the company that I joined nearly 12 years ago



  18. When the Founder of Your Company Supports Donald Trump the Company Ends up Active in Fascist Platforms

    Politics weren’t allowed in Sirius ‘Open Source’, but there were exceptions for some people (close to management) and it didn’t look good



  19. [Meme] Sirius Actually Used to Promote Free/Libre and Open Source Software

    Before people who reject Free/Libre and Open Source software were put in charge of Sirius ‘Open Source’ concrete steps had been taken to support the wider community (or the suppliers, who were mostly volunteers)



  20. Sirius 'Open Source' When It Actually Understood and Respected Software Freedom

    The company my wife and I joined was (at the time) still Free software-centric and reasonably friendly towards staff; today we examine Sirius of a decade ago



  21. Links 03/12/2022: 4MLinux 41, GNOME E-mail System Melting Down

    Links for the day



  22. Links 03/12/2022: KDE Report and Canonical Lying to Staff

    Links for the day



  23. Sirius 'Open Source' Lists 49 Firms/Organisations as Clients But Only 4 of Them Currently Are

    Sirius Open Source is nowhere as popular as it wants people to think



  24. Sirius 'Open Source' Lists 15 People as Staff, But Only 6 Work in the Company

    Sirius Open Source is nowhere as big as it wants people to believe (like it is a trans-Atlantic thriving firm, the “Sirius Group”)



  25. Storm Brewing Over the Future and Nature of the Internet

    Subsidies for Web giants (and shareholders of such giants) will run out; what will happen to the Internet when this inevitably happens?



  26. IRC Proceedings: Friday, December 02, 2022

    IRC logs for Friday, December 02, 2022



  27. 10 Good Things That Happened in 2022

    In the technical domain, 2022 saw some positive developments, especially from the perspective of Freedom-centric and environmentalist folks



  28. Rumour: More Microsoft Layoffs (Big Layoffs) Next Month

    TheLayoff.com, a moderated forum for anonymous voices, has a new comment (less than a day old) about more Microsoft layoffs



  29. Engineers Are Too Expensive for Sirius 'Open Source'

    Sirius Open Source has become almost like a one-man operation, occasionally assisted by associates (external to the company, paid as contractors by the hour), and management that neglects basic duties while it lies to the staff in an effort to ‘pacify’ it



  30. A December Series About the Demise of Sirius 'Open Source'

    Sirius has not been functioning properly for years, but this year it got a lot worse and the story ought to be told; there are many aspects in it that may be applicable to other companies, including those that engage in openwashing for marketing purposes (opportunism)


RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

Recent Posts