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

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

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as well as state procedural rules, permit parties to a lawsuit to conduct discovery, in search of information and documents that may be relevant to the litigation. Parties can issue requests for documents, information (called interrogatories), and admissions of fact to other parties to the lawsuit; parties may use

The term “Transfer Impact Assessment” or “TIA” is relatively new to the world of data privacy. Indeed, according to one widely used legal database the term was not referenced within any academic journals or secondary sources until 2021.[1] The term has come to refer to a written analysis, conducted by a controller or a

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,

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