> Just to clarify (sorry, lawyer comment:o)): ePrivacy Regulation is not a Directive but Regulation. The difference is that while Directives must be implemented by each EU member state in their national legislation, Regulations are directly applicable as if they are national laws so no new national laws will be adopted. GDPR is also a Regulation.
Well, technically speaking, applicable yes, but to inter into force, a regulation needs to be implemented in national law (which requires an implementation law). Moreover, the GDPR offers some (but very little) room for national clarifications. (I am not a lawyer, but I know scholars have identified some areas).
The difference with a Directive is that it needs to be transposed and offers a lot more room for national differences, e.g. the recitals are not mandatory.
So in addition to what has already been said in this thread, I think it will be good to keep an eye on ALL national implementations of the GDPR as well.
Rob
PhD Candidate Leiden University
-----Original message-----
From: " target="_blank">
Sent: Sunday, February 4 2018, 6:41 pm
To: Tim Walters
Cc: Doc Searls; ProjectVRM list
Subject: Re: [projectvrm] ePrivacy Directive
Hi, I am to meet another from the key authors of GDPR next week. He is also from Germany and is now a senior adviser to the EC DG Justice (sg. like the Minister of Justice for the EU). I will try to get him to participate on this list and also comment on New York GDPR. Just to clarify (sorry, lawyer comment:o)): ePrivacy Regulation is not a Directive but Regulation. The difference is that while Directives must be implemented by each EU member state in their national legislation, Regulations are directly applicable as if they are national laws so no new national laws will be adopted. GDPR is also a Regulation. Take care, Zbynek Dne 2018-02-04 15:15, Tim Walters napsal: > I met Jan Philip Albrecht -- the so-called father of the GDPR -- at an > event in Berlin last week. He agreed that the ePR is not likely to be > completed before the end of the year and may not take effect until > 2020. However, when the GDPR takes effect in May, it will determine > some of the practices currently regulated by the ePrivacy Directive. > Jan said that the rather amusing upshot is that the privacy advocates > may find they prefer the GDPR to the proposed ePR (likely to be > watered down further, in fact) and start _supporting_ the delay, while > conversely the lobbyists may find the GDPR application to electronic > communications so onerous that they start pushing for the ePR to be > adopted _sooner_! > > I have to get better educated about how the GDPR and the ePrivacy > Directive will apply until the ePR takes effect. > > Cheers, > tw > > On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 1:30 PM, Doc Searls > < " target="_blank">> wrote: > >> We need to start talking about this. It goes hand-in-hand with the >> GDPR, and provides additional context for what we develop together. >> >> Links: >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ EPrivacy_Regulation_(European_ ) >> [1] >> >> > https://digiday.com/media/Union eprivacy-looming-german- / >> [2] >> >> > https://www.privacytrust.com/publishers-scramble-get-users- logged guidance/gdpr-vs-eprivacy- >> [3] >> >> > https://martechtoday.com/regulation.html right-behind-gdpr-theres- >> [4] >> >> Doc > > > > Links: > ------ > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/eprivacy-regulation-208717 EPrivacy_Regulation_(European_ ) > [2] > https://digiday.com/media/Union eprivacy-looming-german- / > [3] > https://www.privacytrust.com/publishers-scramble-get-users- logged guidance/gdpr-vs-eprivacy- > [4] > https://martechtoday.com/regulation.html right-behind-gdpr-theres- eprivacy-regulation-208717
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.