overview.legal
More
TopicsLawsCase lawEnforcementGuidanceNews

More sources

Literature Academic articles and books Tools Templates, checklists, calculators

Overviews

This week Everything added in the last 7 days Enforcement dashboard Fines by country, authority and article Coverage What the collection holds, and how current

Work with it

Transit Your processing register as a metro map API & AI tools REST, MCP server, context files Alerts & account Follow topics, get digests
About overview.legal Classic layout
News·noyb - European Center for Digital RightsEN
Export

No action taken against PimEyes: noyb lawsuit against Hamburg DPA

This item is a copy of:No action taken against PimEyes: noyb lawsuit against Hamburg DPA

National Administrative Procedures and DPA inactivity Today, noyb has filed a lawsuit against the Hamburg data protection authority (DPA).

Supervisory AuthoritiesBiometric DataBiometric DataTypes of Special Categories of Personal DataPersonal Data
Apr 30, 2026Sourcenoyb.eu

Full text

National Administrative Procedures and DPA inactivity Today, noyb has filed a lawsuit against the Hamburg data protection authority (DPA). While the authority considers the practices of the facial recognition search engine PimEyes to be illegal, it refuses to take effective action because the company seems to be based in Dubai. PimEyes systematically extracts biometric data from images on the internet and uses it to build up a database. Users can upload photos of people to this website to find further images of the same person via facial recognition. The claimant had originally filed a complaint against PimEyes with the Hamburg DPA in July 2020. Complaints procedure C042Background on PimEyes. PimEyes continuously scans the internet to collect faces in a database. The company has already collected billions of images, which are used for its facial recognition search engine. On its website, anyone can identify other people by uploading a photo of them. You are then shown further images of

How it connects

Related across sources

RON 26,236 TIP TOP FOOD INDUSTRY SRL TIP TOP FOOD INDUSTRY SRL (controller) used a time-and-attendance and access-control system on its employees at its premise. This system was using personal data in the form of the… Romania ·ANSPDCP ·Art. 5, 9 Oct 1, 2026 Retention Period Types of Special Categories of Personal Data Integrity and Confidentiality Principle
€2.6M Croatian Gambling Operator The DPA initiated an ex officio investigation against a gambling operator (controller) regarding the identification and registration of players (data subjects) visiting its… Croatia ·AZOP ·Art. 4, 5, 6 +4 Oct 28, 2026 Personal Data Consent Biometric Data
Guidelines 05/2022 use of facial recognition technology in the area of law enforcement Guidelines ·EDPB May 17, 2023 Biometric Data Types of Special Categories of Personal Data Identification
Opinion 11/2024 use of facial recognition to streamline airport passengers’ flow (compatibility with Articles 5(1)(e) and(f), 25 and 32 GDPR) A dopted Opinion 11/2024 on the use of facial recognition to streamline airport passengers’ flow (compatibility with Articles 5(1)(e) and(f), 25 and 32 GDPR Version 1.1 Adopted on… Opinion ·EDPB May 24, 2024 Biometric Data Storage Limitation Identification
C-169/23 Nemzeti Adatvédelmi és Információszabadság Hatóság v UC In Case C-169/23, the Court of Justice of the European Union (Third Chamber) ruled on a preliminary reference from the Kúria (Hungary) concerning whether the Budapest Metropolitan… CJEU ·Third Chamber Nov 28, 2024 Personal Data Legitimate Interest Fairness & Transparency
C-60/22 UZ v Bundesrepublik Deutschland In Case C-60/22, the CJEU (Fifth Chamber) ruled on a preliminary reference from the Verwaltungsgericht Wiesbaden concerning UZ, a third-country national, and the Bundesrepublik… CJEU ·Fifth Chamber May 4, 2023 Right to Restriction Controllers Records of processing activities
Related documents