Short Reads

Dutch Data Protection Authority imposes an order subject to penalty on Wi-Fi-tracker Bluetrace

Dutch Data Protection Authority imposes an order subject to penalty on Wi-Fi-tracker Bluetrace

Dutch Data Protection Authority imposes an order subject to penalty on Wi-Fi-tracker Bluetrace

13.09.2016 NL law

 

Source: CLSR

In 2015, the Dutch Data Protection Authority ("DPA") investigated the practices of Dutch company Bluetrace B.V. Bluetrace provides Wi-Fi tracking-technology which collects the MAC addresses (Media Access Control address) of devices (smartphones, tablets, etc.) of visitors in certain areas via Wi-Fi. Each Wi-Fi function on a device sends out a unique MAC address. Based on the received MAC addresses and the date and time, the Wi-Fi tracking technology determines the location of a device and how many devices are located in a certain area. As such, Bluetrace is able to track the movement of a visitor and the stores he or she visits in the respective area. The purpose of collecting such data is to generate information on the visitor mass and (shopping) behavior of visitors.  Customers of Bluetrace use this information to determine how attractive the location of a store is or to schedule their personnel as efficient as possible.

The  DPA addressed various violations of  data protection and information obligations by Bluetrace and instructed Bluetrace to take measures. Bluetrace made several changes to its systems, such as limiting the storage of collected personal data to 24 hours,  implementing a privacy policy and providing stickers and information brochures on Wi-Fi-tracking. However, the DPA found that the measures taken by Bluetrace were not sufficient. For instance,  the information provided by Bluetrace to visitors was incorrect and incomplete as it did not state that Bluetrace collects personal data or how long these personal data is stored. Furthermore, Bluetrace could not provide a reasonable explanation why it is necessary for Bluetrace to collect data from passersby or residents in the nearby area. The DPA concluded in its decision of 1 September 2016 that Bluetrace was still in violation of the Dutch Data Protection Act.  

The DPA therefore imposed an order subject to penalty (last onder dwangsom), stating that Bluetrace should either stop collecting personal data via Wi-Fi-tracking or take measures to:   

  • avoid collecting personal data from residents in the (nearby) area;
  • encrypt or delete personal data collected from visitors outside stores immediately after collecting such data; and
  • provide visitors inside and outside stores with understandable and visible information on the identity of Bluetrace, the purpose of the collection of personal data,  how long this data is stored and where visitors can obtain further information, before or ultimately at the moment the personal data is collected.  

Bluetrace has six months to comply with the order of the DPA, otherwise the company owes a penalty of EUR 5,000 for each week they have not complied with the order (with a maximum penalty of EUR 100,000). The DPA granted Bluetrace a long period of six months because it considered that most measures are to be implemented on site (i.e. in stores or in the nearby area) which may require permits or approvals from the respective municipalities. As such, the DPA considered a period of six months to be reasonable.  

It is unknown whether Bluetrace has appealed to the decision of the DPA.   

Further information: 
https://autoriteitpersoonsgegevens.nl/sites/default/files/atoms/files/openbare_versie_last_onder_dwangsom_bluetrace_definitief.pdf (only available in Dutch)

Related news

20.09.2022 EU law
Launch of Metaverse blog series

Articles - Stibbe launches a new blog series focusing on the legal challenges of the Metaverse. In our upcoming blog posts, we will discuss the legal challenges of NFTs, crypto-assets, Metaverse platforms, crypto exchanges, DAO, and many more.

Read more

28.07.2022 NL law
Purely commercial interest also a legitimate interest? Council of State leaves the question unanswered.

Short Reads - On 27 July 2022, the Council of State confirmed that the Dutch Data Protection Authority wrongly imposed a €575,000 fine on VoetbalTV. But the Council did not answer the question whether the AP rightly or wrongly believes that a purely commercial interest cannot be a legitimate interest within the meaning of the General Data Protection Regulation.

Read more

11.05.2022 NL law
De afweging van grondrechten in het kader van corona

Articles - COVID-19 heeft de maatschappij voor dilemma’s geplaatst bij de afweging van volksgezondheid en bescherming van kwetsbaren tegenover vrijheden van het individu. In Tijdschrift voor Arbeidsrecht in Context schetsen Frederiek Fernhout en Judica Krikke de onderliggende rechten en vrijheden die vastgelegd zijn in het Europese grondrechtenkader, de AVG en nationale arbeidswetgeving en bespreken zij hoe deze tegen elkaar moeten worden afgewogen in de context van coronamaatregelen.

Read more

28.07.2022 NL law
Zuiver commercieel belang ook gerechtvaardigd belang: Raad van State laat zich er niet over uit

Short Reads - Op 27 juli 2022 heeft de Raad van State bevestigd dat de Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens onterecht een boete van € 575.000 aan VoetbalTV heeft opgelegd. De hoop bestond dat de Afdeling antwoord zou geven op de vraag of de AP terecht of onterecht meent dat een zuiver commercieel belang géén gerechtvaardigd belang kan zijn in de zin van de Algemene Verordening Gegevensbescherming. Het antwoord op deze vraag blijft echter uit.  

Read more