What are the main differences between the 2002 ePrivacy Directive/PECR and the proposed ePrivacy Regulation?
The ePrivacy Regulation will expand the 2002 Directive’s scope to cover newer technologies like instant messaging apps and VoIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) platforms, and machine-to-machine communications such as the IoT (Internet of Things).
As the Regulation’s final text is yet to be agreed, it is impossible to provide a detailed commentary on how it differs from the Directive. However, certain areas are worth examining.
Cookies
The ePrivacy Directive was nicknamed ‘the cookie law’. It prompted many organisations to introduce cookie walls and consent mechanisms that prevented end users from accessing websites unless they blindly accepted cookies.
The ePrivacy Regulation is meant to eliminate such issues while still giving people online privacy and protecting the confidentiality of their terminal equipment.
The Commission’s proposal states that cookies used only to process information anonymously should no longer require end-user consent. This should mean fewer cookie walls and banners for end users.
Many other exemptions from consent are retained in the proposal, including cookies necessary for:
- Transmitting a communication.
- Security.
- Billing or collecting payments; or
- Detecting or stopping fraud.
Even though there are fewer restrictions about collecting electronic communications data, the ePrivacy Regulation sets out rules about how that data must be stored, protected and erased.
However, in October 2019 the European Court of Justice ruled that users must actively consent to companies storing any cookies on their equipment, irrespective of “whether or not the information stored or accessed on the user’s equipment is personal data”. We should expect to see this reflected in the final draft of the Regulation.
Where consent is required, the GDPR’s standard for consent applies.
à For more information on the GDPR’s standard for consent, read our blog ‘GDPR: lawful bases for processing, with examples’
Processing electronic communications content and/or metadata
The proposed use of legitimate interests as a lawful basis for processing electronic communications metadata also proves contentious.
On 25 May 2018, the EDPB (European Data Protection Board) released its Statement on the revision of the ePrivacy Regulation and its impact on the protection of individuals with regard to the privacy and confidentiality of their communications, which recommends that:
“User consent should be obtained systematically in a technically viable and enforceable manner before processing electronic communications data or before using the storage or processing capabilities of a user’s terminal equipment. There should be no exceptions to process this data based on the ‘legitimate interest’ of the data controller, or on the general purpose of the performance of a contract.”
Marketing communications
Article 16 of the Commission’s draft states that end users may not be sent direct marketing communications unless they consent.
It then provides several exemptions, including marketing to existing customers. It sets out rules for marketers, including the obligation to reveal their identity and provide the opportunity for recipients to opt out of further marketing communications.
The Council’s latest draft amends Article 16 to refer to ‘unsolicited’ and direct marketing communications and adds the option for member states to set a time limit after which organisations may not send marketing communications to their customers.
Note that, although the GDPR states in Recital 47 that “The processing of personal data for direct marketing purposes may be regarded as carried out for a legitimate interest”, the ePrivacy Regulation, as ‘lex specialis’ to the GDPR’s ‘lex generalis’, will overrule the GDPR, so if the final version requires consent, legitimate interests will not be valid for direct marketing even though the GDPR says they are.
End users will also have the absolute right to object, in which case you must stop marketing to them as soon as possible, but certainly within one month. You must also inform them of that right and the fact that you intend to use their data for direct marketing purposes.