Photo of Carsten A. Kociok

Carsten Kociok focuses his practice on the technology industry. He has broad experience in the areas of Internet, information technology, electronic and mobile payments and new media, as well as regulatory and data protection law issues.

Carsten advises national and international companies from the Internet, payments and technology industries on the commercial and regulatory side of their business, in particular in the areas of e-commerce and e-business, electronic and mobile payments, service distribution, franchising, outsourcing and technology transactions. This includes all aspects of e-money and payments law, financial services law, data protection and data security regulations, money laundering obligations as well as marketing, unfair competition, consumer protection and general contract law.

Prior to joining the firm, Carsten worked at Olswang for eight years and in the Capital Transaction Practice Group of an international law firm in New York.

On July 10, 2023, the European Commission adopted its long-awaited adequacy decision on the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework (the “Framework”) thereby concluding that the United States ensures an adequate level of protection for personal data that are transferred from the European Union to companies in the U.S. that participate in the Framework.

The

Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) allows individuals to request that their information be deleted in the following situations:[1]

  1. Companies must delete data upon request if the data was processed based solely on consent. The GDPR recognizes that companies may process data based on six alternate lawful grounds.[2] One of these is where

Data typically is needed to train and fine-tune modern artificial intelligence models. AI can use data – including personal information – in order to recognize patterns and predict results.

The EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) permits controllers to process personal information if one (or more) of the following six lawful processing purposes applies:[1]

Data typically is needed to train and fine-tune modern artificial intelligence models. AI can use data – including personal information – to recognize patterns and predict results.

Companies that utilize personal information to train an AI may either be acting as a controller or a processor depending on the degree of discretion that they exercise

The EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) applies to two types of entities – “controllers” and “processors.” 

A “controller” refers to an entity that “determines the purposes and means” of how personal information will be processed.[1] Determining the “means” of processing refers to deciding “how” information will be processed.[2] That does not necessitate

All contracts that used the traditional Standard Contractual Clauses must be updated and repapered by 27 December 2022. To help companies comply with the deadline, Greenberg Traurig’s Data Privacy & Cybersecurity Group has compiled a 90-page guide explaining how to apply the new Standard Contractual Clauses in over 40 different transfer scenarios – ranging from

After an extended sunset period, time to replace the “old” SCCs runs out on Dec. 27, 2022. After that date, the old SCCs will no longer legalize data transfers to countries outside the European Economic Area (EEA). To avoid compliance risks associated with illegal transfers of personal data, any old SCCs should be updated to

The following is part of Greenberg Traurig’s ongoing series analyzing cross-border data transfers in light of the new Standard Contractual Clauses approved by the European Commission in June 2021.

Visual Description and Implications
  • The EDPB has taken the position that a data subject “cannot be considered a controller or processor,”[1] and, as a result,

The following is part of Greenberg Traurig’s ongoing series analyzing cross-border data transfers in light of the new Standard Contractual Clauses approved by the European Commission in June 2021.

Visual Description and Implications
Transfers from a European Data Subject: Data Subject→Controller (US)→Processor (US)
  • The EDPB has taken the position that a data subject “cannot be considered a controller or processor,”1 and, as a result,

The following is part of Greenberg Traurig’s ongoing series analyzing cross-border data transfers in light of the new Standard Contractual Clauses approved by the European Commission in June 2021.

Visual Description and Implications
Transfers from a European Data Subject: Data Subject→Controller (US)→Controller (non-EEA)
  • The EDPB has taken the position that a data subject “cannot be considered a controller or processor,”1 and, as a result,