Skip to content

In addition, where data is publicly accessible, such providers should not prevent researchers meeting an appropriate subset of criteria from using this data for research purposes that contribute to the detection, identification and understanding of systemic risks. They should provide access to such researchers including, where technically possible, in real-time, to the publicly accessible data, for example on aggregated interactions with content from public pages, public groups, or public figures, including impression and engagement data such as the number of reactions, shares, comments from recipients of the service. Providers of very large online platforms or of very large online search engines should be encouraged to cooperate with researchers and provide broader access to data for monitoring societal concerns through voluntary efforts, including through commitments and procedures agreed under codes of conduct or crisis protocols. Those providers and researchers should pay particular attention to the protection of personal data, and ensure that any processing of personal data complies with Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Providers should anonymise or pseudonymise personal data except in those cases that would render impossible the research purpose pursued.

Related across sources

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-268/21 Norra Stockholm Bygg AB v Per Nycander AB In Case C-268/21, the Court of Justice of the European Union (Third Chamber) ruled on a preliminary reference from the Swedish Supreme Court in proceedings between Norra Stockholm… CJEU ·Third Chamber Mar 2, 2023 Retention Period Personal Data Material scope (GDPR)
C-175/20 SIA 'SS' v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests In Case C-175/20, the Court of Justice of the EU interpreted GDPR Articles 5 and 6 in response to a preliminary ruling from the Latvian Regional Administrative Court concerning a… CJEU ·Fifth Chamber Feb 24, 2022 Retention Period Personal Data Integrity and Confidentiality Principle
15625/2026 Italian Supreme Court upholds €300,000 DPA fine against INPS over COVID bonus data Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS, the controller) is the Italian National Institute for Social Security. In 2021, the DPA fined the controller €300,000 for its… May 21, 2026 Privacy by Design & Default Privacy by Design DPIA
C-604/22 IAB Europe v Gegevensbeschermingsautoriteit In Case C-604/22, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled on a preliminary reference from the Brussels Court of Appeal in proceedings between IAB Europe and the Belgian… CJEU ·Fourth Chamber Mar 7, 2024 Controllers IP Address Personal Data
C-687/21 BL v MediaMarktSaturn Hagen-Iserlohn GmbH In Case C-687/21, the Court of Justice of the European Union interpreted Articles 5, 24, 32, and 82 of the GDPR in response to a preliminary ruling request from the Amtsgericht… CJEU ·Third Chamber Jan 25, 2024 Liability Integrity and Confidentiality Principle Personal Data