This study provides recommendations on how to make personal data portability more effective. This will truly empower consumers to use the services they want and share their data with whoever they wish and stimulate innovation in Europe. With the entry into force of the GDPR, European citizens gained new rights, notably with data portability. But two years later, there is still little sign of people exercising this right, and of companies offering an easy and convenient service for data portability. While the European Commission is finalising its evaluation of the GDPR and closes its consultation on the European data strategy, the authors, professors Jan Krämer, Pierre Senellart and Alexandre de Streel*, warn that the current legal framework requires clarifications to better empower European citizens in a data-driven society. In this study, they identify barriers to data portability, including the lack of possibilities to import data as well as the lack of common standards and tools to access data as easy as the click of a button. The ability to provide users with a centralised dashboard for monitoring and controlling the flow of their data is also critically missing. “Today, consumers do not widely use data portability for reasons that can and should be overcome. Making data portability more effective is better for competition, for innovation and to empower users,” stress the authors. “There should be no second-guessing on whether to make data portability more effective, the time to act is now.” The current EU framework encourages data portability, but there are legal gaps that the EU should fill. The authors insist on the need for detailed guidance on how data portability can be facilitated and on which data is subject to data portability without violating privacy rights. They advocate that data provided by users when using a service, such as search history (i.e. “observed data”) should clearly be included under the scope of data portability. The authors consider it essential that the obligation to offer standardised Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) be much more widespread to enable consumers to continuously port their data. “We believe that standardised APIs that enable continuous data portability is a prerequisite for encouraging more organisations to import personal data, and for encouraging more consumers to initiate such transfers,” explain the authors. Projects, such as the Data Transfer Project have highlighted that continuous data portability is technically feasible. The authors argue that Personal Management Information Systems (PIMSs) facilitate the complex consent management and offer users a centralised dashboard for monitoring and controlling the flow of their data will have a crucial role to play for the wider adoption of data portability. “It must be as easy as clicking a button for consumers to continuously share data they created with one provider to another provider. This may also require educating and informing users on their rights through information campaigns alongside clear policy measures,” explain the authors. Nevertheless, they stress that PIMSs are not likely to find a sustainable business model, and thus, policy makers should support the emergence of open-source projects by setting common standards for data transfers, consent management, and identity management.

Inhaltsangabe:Introduction: Recent years have witnessed the great popularity of online social networking services, in which millions of members publicly articulate mutual friend- ship relations. Social network services have become a major application in the internet. Correspondingly the number of provider such social net- work services has multiplied and accommodates estimated 272 million users worldwide (Universalmccann, 2008). The mass adoption of social networking websites points to an evolution in human social interaction. These sites let the user create an identity namely their profile, which they fill with personal information. These identities can then be searched and relationships among the users can be made. A user can make friends virtually and by that creates his own social circle, that is why it can also be regarded as a reflection of the real world. Most of the users are part in more than one social network, which creates problems in terms of identity and relation management. At the moment there seems to be no consolidation among the services, but a further fragmentation and by that also a fragmentation of information. In the real world people can be easily identified, but this is not possible in the internet as there is no physical contact. People using assumed names as an identifier which may be different on every platform. On top of this it is difficult to manage all the contacts which are spread over several services. At the moment the social network services do not o er ways to get the data out of their platforms to reuse it somewhere else. The use of separate networks may be wanted by the users regarding order and different roles they can slip into. In spite of these aspects there is an increasing demand for reusing and sharing the contact data to be able to manage the online friendships . To overcome the disadvantages of fragmented data central storage has to be established. In combination with exchange mechanisms it would make data reusable, which means all the social networks the user is part of could be synchronised. This is especially useful when entering a new network. It is like moving into a new city and already know some people. Inevitable for such a scenario is that the information of the social networks are portable and that the user can be uniquely identified. There are e orts to achieve this goal, but up to now only partial problems have been solved. An overall concept seems not possible at the moment due to [...]

Amidst the transition from Open Banking to Open Finance across the European Union (EU), this insightful book delves into how individuals' control over their data is impacted. With Open Banking reshaping data sharing, the EU seeks to extend this model to sectors like insurance through Open Finance. The research examines how this shift affects the Right to Data Portability (RDP), giving users the ability to manage and transfer their data among financial service providers. Through qualitative analysis, it clarifies the dynamics between RDP, Open Banking, and Open Finance. Chapters trace the regulatory evolution, explore standardization efforts like the 'SEPA API Access Scheme', and address challenges such as defining data categories and legal processing grounds. The book advocates for a user-centric approach to Open Finance regulation, emphasizing trust and privacy in the digital financial landscape. Texto de contracapa: Amidst the transition from Open Banking to Open Finance across the European Union (EU), this insightful book delves into how individuals' control over their data is impacted. With Open Banking reshaping data sharing, the EU seeks to extend this model to sectors like insurance through Open Finance. The research examines how this shift affects the Right to Data Portability (RDP), giving users the ability to manage and transfer their data among financial service providers. Through qualitative analysis, it clarifies the dynamics between RDP, Open Banking, and Open Finance. Chapters trace the regulatory evolution, explore standardization efforts like the 'SEPA API Access Scheme', and address challenges such as defining data categories and legal processing grounds. The book advocates for a user-centric approach to Open Finance regulation, emphasizing trust and privacy in the digital financial landscape.

This report examines the opportunities of enhancing access to and sharing of data (EASD) in the context of the growing importance of artificial intelligence and the Internet of Things. It discusses how EASD can maximise the social and economic value of data re-use and how the related risks and challenges can be addressed. It highlights the trade-offs, complementarities and possible unintended consequences of policy action – and inaction. It also provides examples of EASD approaches and policy initiatives in OECD countries and partner economies.

This incisive book provides a much-needed examination of the legal issues arising from the data economy, particularly in the light of the expanding role of algorithms and artificial intelligence in business and industry. In doing so, it discusses the pressing question of how to strike a balance in the law between the interests of a variety of stakeholders, such as AI industry, businesses and consumers.

Die Datenwirtschaft der EU konnte sich in den nachsten Jahren verdoppeln, wenn politische und rechtliche Rahmenbedingungen rechtzeitig geschaffen werden. Den ersten Schritt hat die EU bereits mit der Einfuhrung der DSGVO gemacht, die das Recht auf Datenubertragbarkeit (RtDP) einfuhrte. Zwar zielt das RtDP primar darauf ab, betroffene Personen eine grossere Kontrolle uber ihre personenbezogenen Daten zu bieten, es hat jedoch auch einen wettbewerbsfordernden Charakter als Instrument zur Verringerung eines Lock-in-Effekts bei Verbrauchern. Das RtDP ist jedoch kein absolutes Recht, denn Art. 20(4) der DSGVO schreibt vor, dass es "die Rechte und Freiheiten anderer nicht nachteilig beeintrachtigen darf" [englische Fassung]. Dies schliesst wohl das von der Datenbankrichtlinie vorgeschriebene sui-generis Datenbankrecht ein, welches eine Moglichkeit fur Verantwortliche darstellen konnte, eine Anforderung auf Datenubertragbarkeit nicht nachzukommen. Leider hat sich die zweite Ex-post-Bewertung der Datenbankrichtlinie durch die EU-Kommission nicht mit diesem potentiellen Konflikt befasst. Vor diesem Hintergrund soll die Schnittstelle zwischen dem RtDP und dem sui-generis Datenbankrecht, unter besonderer Berucksichtigung des Kontexts der Datenwirtschaft untersucht und neu definiert werden.

All are agreed that the digital economy contributes to a dynamic evolution of markets and competition. Nonetheless, concerns are increasingly raised about the market dominance of a few key players. Because these companies hold the power to drive rivals out of business, regulators have begun to seek scope for competition enforcement in cases where companies claim that withholding data is needed to satisfy customers and cut costs. This book is the first focus on how competition law enforcement tools can be applied to refusals of dominant firms to give access data on online platforms such as search engines, social networks, and e-commerce platforms – commonly referred to as the ‘gatekeepers’ of the Internet. The question arises whether the denial of a dominant firm to grant competitors access to its data could constitute a ‘refusal to deal’ and lead to competition law liability under the so-called ‘essential facilities doctrine', according to which firms need access to shared knowledge in order to be able to compete. A possible duty to share data with rivals also brings to the forefront the interaction of competition law with data protection legislation considering that the required information may include personal data of individuals. Building on the refusal to deal concept, and using a multidisciplinary approach, the analysis covers such issues and topics as the following: – data portability; – interoperability; – data as a competitive advantage or entry barrier in digital markets; – market definition and dominance with respect to data; – disruptive versus sustaining innovation; – role of intellectual property regimes; – economic trade-off in essential facilities cases; – relationship of competition enforcement with data protection law and – data-related competition concerns in merger cases. The author draws on a wealth of relevant material, including EU and US decision-making practice, case law, and policy documents, as well as economic and empirical literature on the link between competition and innovation. The book concludes with a proposed framework for the application of the essential facilities doctrine to potential forms of abuse of dominance relating to data. In addition, it makes suggestions as to how data protection interests can be integrated into competition policy. An invaluable contribution to ongoing academic and policy discussions about how data-related competition concerns should be addressed under competition law, the analysis clearly demonstrates how existing competition tools for market definition and assessment of dominance can be applied to online platforms. It will be of immeasurable value to the many jurists, business persons, and academics concerned with this very timely subject.