Open data support

What have we changed?

Thanks to our comments and the activity of the Czech Pirate Party, an amendment was passed to protect open data from objections regarding the protection of personal data.

In particular, the minimalist amendment to the Freedom of Information Act 106 was passed, as it provides a legal basis for the processing of state-provided "open data": "It is understood that legitimate interests or rights and freedoms of the data subject requiring the protection of personal data shall not take precedence over further processing of open data." (PN prepared by MP Profant).

We believe that we need to change the GDPR itself, which is negatively affecting business and technology development within the EU.

Areas of B2B negatively affected by the GDPR regulation:

• developing free trade between EU countries
• reduction of the verifiability of companies within B2B and B2C
• reduced transparency in the use of public funds from the European Union
• development of software solutions within the EU
• open data
• the efficiency of European companies
• deterioration in the efficiency of sales departments
• deterioration of business conditions for small and start-up companies

More explanations on each area can be found here.

What we have already done:

• We have sent two letters to all MEPs with our comments on the GDPR. Read more here.
• we contributed to the change of the implementing regulation within the Czech Republic

What needs to change under GDPR?

• The GDPR is intended to address the issue of open data from commercial and business registers and its priority over the protection of personal data. We want to ensure that the GDPR cannot be used as an excuse for the data presented in commercial and business registers and the open data from them provided by individual countries. These data should take precedence over the protection of personal data, but unfortunately, for example, the Czech Data Protection Authority still considers that the changes within the GDPR implementing regulation do not apply and that data provided in the form of open data do not take precedence over the protection of personal data.

• exempt data published in commercial and business registers from data protection. If someone wants to act as a company, business person, organization, etc. It has to endure the processing, publication of these data by other entities. These data are to be used within the information, accounting systems, they are to be used for verifiability of current activities as well as previous activities. It is in the public interest that the business history of individual persons and entities should be verifiable. At the same time, it is desirable that this data can be used in information and business systems to increase efficiency and improve the verifiability of entities within the EU.

• publicly presented contacts are to be exempted from GDPR protection. Contact details of companies, businesssmen, institutions that themselves publish as contact details of their company, organisation are not to be taken as personal data.

• The GDPR is not meant to be a tool used to hide business history, protect criminals, rogue entrepreneurs and organisations. These entities like to use the GDPR as a way to protect themselves by covering up their former or illegal activities so that the public cannot be informed about these activities. Conversely, it is in the public interest that business history or fraudulent activity is traceable to prevent the recurrence of fraud and other activities that may harm both end consumers and other business entities within the EU.

What we want to do:

• to re-call all MEPs and members of the European Commission. This time, however, we want to translate our statements into the national languages of MEPs so that they are more likely to read them. The Czech version of our last email was opened by 35% of Czech and Slovak MEPs. Only 15.5% of MEPs from other EU countries opened the English version.

• to call on all MEPs in all Member States to put pressure on their parties' MEPs. Again in their national languages.

• support our efforts with a petition with as many signatures as possible. We need to back up our statement with more weight, i.e., that other companies and entities perceive the negative consequences we mentioned as real. If we manage to get thousands of companies and individuals to sign the petition, our request will certainly be given more weight than in the case of the activity of one small company.

• create an online campaign to promote our petition. We need to get the word out to as many companies and individuals as possible about this effort, so that the petition gets as many votes as possible and carries more weight.

How can you help us?