First Video Surveillance GDPR Fine In France

By: Charles Rollet, Published on Jul 08, 2019

The French government has imposed a sizeable fine on a small business for violating the GDPR after it constantly filmed employees without informing them and kept poor encryption practices. It marks the first ever GDPR video surveillance fine ever issued by the CNIL, France’s data protection agency, it has confirmed to IPVM.

first gdpr fine in france

In this post, we examine the case and what it means for GDPR compliance going forward, including:

France Video Surveillance Regulations Context
Company Background
CNIL Allegations
What GDPR Articles Were Violated
How the Fine Was Calculated
Broader Impact/Conclusion

For background, see our GDPR For Video Surveillance Guide.

Ultimately, the case shows the importance of GDPR compliance and working closely with data authorities to address issues. However, the evidence we found shows no stepped up GDPR violation enforcement for video surveillance.

*** ****** ********** *** imposed * ******** **** on * ***** ******** for ********* *** **** after ** ********** ****** employees ******* ********* **** and **** **** ********** practices. ** ***** *** first **** **** ***** surveillance **** **** ****** by *******, ******’* **** ********** agency, ** *** ********* to ****.

first gdpr fine in france

** **** ****, ** examine *** **** *** what ** ***** *** GDPR ********** ***** *******, including:

****** ***** ************ *********** Context
******* **********
**** ***********
**** **** ******** **** Violated
*** *** **** *** Calculated
******* ******/**********

*** **********, *** ******* *** ***** ************ Guide.

**********, *** **** ***** the ********** ** **** compliance *** ******* ******* with **** *********** ** address ******. *******, *** evidence ** ***** ***** no ******* ** **** violation *********** *** ***** surveillance.

[***************]

Context: ******* ****** ***********

** ******, ***** ************************** ******* **** *********, and **** *** *** case ********** *** ****. *** *******, ******* individuals****** ******* ******* **** film ****** ********, **** * ******** in ***** ** ***** own *****. ** *** workplace, ******** ************ ** employees ** ********** - see **** ******* ****** by ******* ** *******:

***********:***, *** *** ******* security ******* ** *** [office] ******* *** ******** purposes.**, ** ** ********* to ******* ********* ** this *******.

Enforcement ***

*******, ****** *********** ** video ************ *********** ** low, *** **** *** not ******* ***** *** GDPR *** ******. ** 2017, **** *** ******* in *** ***** ******* was ***** *** ***** surveillance ********** ***** ** employee ********** ** * camera ******* *** ****; the **** *** *,*** euros ($*,***). *** * single ******* *** ***** in ****, *** **** the **** *** ******. From**********, *** ****** ** CNIL ***** ************ ******* investigations **** ******** **** 47 ** **, *** annual ******* ****.

************, **** ***** ************ investigations *** ********* ***** on **********, * ****** of**** *******************, ***** ***** *** CNIL ** *** *********** inspecting *** *** *****, integrators, ** ****** *** possible **********.

Company **********

*** ******* **** *** fined ** ***************, * *********** **** based ** ***** **** only * *********. *** revenue ** **** *** about $* ******* *** it **** ****** ** over $***,***, *** ******** ***********.

CNIL ***********

*** **** ********* **** it ***** *** ************* based ** ******** ********** about *********’* ************ ******: a ***** ** *, starting *** *** *** back ** ****. ** sent ******* ******* ** Uniontrad *** ******** ** response.

****’* ***** ****** ********** took ***** ** ******** 2018, *******:

* ****** ****** *** desks *** * ******… employees **** ***** ******** notified
******* *** ****** *** longer **** ******* ******
******** ** ***** ** access ******* *********** *** [email] ******* *** *** ensure **** ******** *** confidentiality (********'* ********* *** not ******* ********* *** employees ****** * ****** email *******)

** ****, *** **** gave ********* *** ****** to *** *** ***** issues. ** *********, ********* claimed ** * ****** that ** *** ********* them, *** * ****** CNIL ********** * ***** later ***** ****:

*** ****** ******* ********* has **** ***** ** constantly *** ******* ************ since *** ******* ********** in ********
** *********** *** **** relayed ** *** ********* about *** ***** ************, which ****** ************ **** the ******* ** *** processing, ******** ** *******, and ****** ********** *** data
*** * ****** ******** policy *** **** *** in ***** *** *** employee's ********* *** ** measures **** **** ***** to ****** ************ ** [who ** *****] *** email *****

***** *** ****** **********, Uniontrad ******* ** *** complied **** *** *** by ******* ******* **** on *** ******** ******, putting ** * ****, and ************ ******** ********. However, *** **** ********** that *** ****** *** still ******* *** ******** desk.

**********, *** **** ****** that ******* ********* *** not ****** ********* ****** the *** ***** ****** in ****, *** *** ignored ************** ***** ** that, * *********/****** ******* would *****.

What **** ******** **** ********

************, *** **** ****** that **** **** ******** were ******** ** *********:

******* *, **:******** **** ***** ** adequate, ******** *** ******* to **** ** ********* in ******** ** *** purposes *** ***** **** are ********* (‘**** ************’). **** ******* ******** to *** ******** ***** surveillance ** *********'* *********. French ******* **** (**** pre-GDPR) ** *** ****** this, ****** *** **** the **** ***** "*********** circumstances", **** ** ****** sensitive ************, *** * translation ******* **** *** qualify, *** **** ******. For **** ***** ****** laws ** ********** ********** employees, *******'* ************ *** **** *********** a $*.* ******* **** on * ****** *** "excessive ***** ************."
******* **:*********** ***********, ************* *** modalities *** *** ******** of *** ****** ** the **** *******". *.*. ********* *** not *********** ** *** employees ***** *** ***** surveillance ****** *****.
******* **:*********** ** ** ******** where ******** **** *** collected **** *** **** subject.******* ** ******* **. Uniontrad *** *** *** up * ******* ******* sign ********* ********* ** the **** ********** ****** place, *** ****** ** contacted *** **** *******, storage ********, ***. *** IPVM's**** *** ***** ************ Guide*** **** ***** **** kind ** *********** ****** be *** ** ** such *****.
******* **:******** ** **********: *** processor ***** ********* *********** technical *** ************** ******** to ****** * ***** of ******** *********** ** the ****. **** ****** ** Uniontrad's **** ** ********* on ******* *********, ***** CNIL ****** "*** *** ensure *** ******** ** personal ****".

How *** **** *** **********

***** *******'* ******* **,* ******* **** ** 20 ******* ***** ($**.* million) ** *% ** global ****** ******* ** permitted, ********* ** ******. Fines **** ** "effective, *************, *** **********".

*** **** ********* ********** a **** ** **,*** euros ($**,***). ****** **********'* ***** ***** ************ GDPR ****,*** **** *** *** offer * ********* ** how **** **** ********* cost. *** **** ****** was ******* ********** ** the ******** ********** ***** Uniontrad ***** **** *** its ******* ** **** with **** ************* ** fix *** ******, **** the **** *******:

*** ******* - ******** to **** ** ****** - ***** ******** ************ with *** **** ***** the ****** ******* *** already ***** ***.

*******, ********* **** **** a **** *** "****************" under ******* ** *** to *** *******'* **** financial *********. *** **** agreed *** ******* ** fine ********* **,*** ***** (about $**,***). **** ** the ********** *** *** the **** ** ** made ****** - **** is *** * *** practice, ** *** ** seen **** **** **** of******** **** *****.

Broader **** ************

*** ********* **** ********* the ********** ** **** compliance. **,*** ***** *** a *****, *****-****** ******* is * *** *** and ** *** ******* video ************ **** *** CNIL *** ****** ***** at ***** ****, ********* to ********* ******** ** *********.

*** **** **** ** GDPR ********** **** ********* was ******* ** ***** how *** *** *** given **** ********** *********** a *** *** **** sophisticated ******* ** ****** against *********; ***** ** the ****, ***** ************ violations **** ******* ****** against******'* ***** **** ** law *** ******** *******.

*******, *** ****'* ******* should *** ** *****. Enforcement ** *** **** stringent. ** ********* *******, zero ***** ************ ***** were **** *** **** the **** ******, *** the ****** ** ***** surveillance ************** ******** ************* (47 ** **) **** 2017 ** ****.

**** ***** *** **** directly ** ** *** stepping ** *** *********** of ***** ************ *********** due ** *** ****. They **** ** - the **** ****** ****** by *** **** (** enforcement *****) ** *** maximum ********* **** ***** raised ** ** ******* euros ** *% ** global ****** ******* - admittedly * *** ******, but ********** *** ******* players, ********** ***** *** GDPR ****** ******** **** fines ** "*************".

Comments (15)

Undisclosed Integrator #1

07/08/19 04:20pm

****. * **** **** asked **** ***** ****** how ****** ** ** that *** ** ** Canada ****** ********* ******* to ****. ** ** opinion ***** *** ******* administration, **** ** ********. However, ****** *** *** shift ******** ****** *** left ** *** **** few ***** ** ** a ***********.

******* ******** **** *** come ** **** * do *** **** ** answer *** - ** EU ********* ***** * corporate ************ ** *** US **** **** ***** to **** ** ********?

Undisclosed #3

In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #1 | 07/08/19 05:24pm

** **** **** * way ** ********** **** ************** ** will ********** **** * use **** ** *** US.

Bill Williams

In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #1 | 07/08/19 05:32pm

** ************* ** **** is **** ** ******* to ** ******** ******** they ***. *******, **** can **** ****** * fine ** * ***-** company ** **** **** operate ** *** **.

*** ****** ***** **** bigger ********* *** ******** privacy ********** **** *** broadly ** **** **** GDPR ********** ** **** is ******* ** *** US.

****

Undisclosed #4

In reply to Bill Williams | 07/11/19 11:33am

*******, **** *** **** impose * **** ** a ***-** ******* ** they **** ******* ** the **.

**** ****** ****** **** right ****.

******* *** ********* ******* and ********** ******* ****** possible ** **** ***** fine, *** *******, * Japanese ******* ***** ******** in ***** ;)

Daniel Tyrrell

In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #1 | 07/08/19 06:07pm

******* ******** **** *** come ** **** * do *** **** ** answer *** - ** EU ********* ***** * corporate ************ ** *** US **** **** ***** to **** ** ********?

***** **** *** **** under *** ***** ****? An ******** ********* ** an ** ****** ***** have **** *****, *** not *** ***** *** around ** **'* * European ***.

** ***** ****'* *** I ********** **. ********* I, * ********, ****** be **** ** ***** pot ** *** ******* I ****, ***** **'* legal ** ******.

Charles Rollet

In reply to Daniel Tyrrell | 07/09/19 03:37am

** ********, **** ** a **** ******** **** comes ** *****. ** I **** ** ****** with *** **** *** every ** *******/********, ** matter ***** **** ***? If ** ***** ****** in *** **** **** has * ******** ****** that ****** * ******* tourist, **** **** ******* now **** *** ***** to ****** * **** complaint?

*** ****** ** **. *** **** **** not ******* "** ********" or "** *********" ********. The **** "******* ** *** ********** of ******** **** ** data ********who *** ** *** ***** [emphasis added]", according to ******* * ('*********** *****'). ** **** ***** people - ********** ** citizenship ** ********* - within *** ** *** protected ** *** ****. If **** ***** *** Union, **** *** ***.

Undisclosed Integrator #2

07/08/19 04:29pm

** * ******* *** stand *** **** ** the ***** *** ***'* see ** *** *****, can't *** *** **********. With * ********* * would ******* ********* **** must **** **** ***** on **** **** * vendetta ** **** ****.

***** **** **** *** is *** ***** *** not **** ********** **. Leaving ** *****. *** employees ***** **'* ******* and *** **** *** happy.

Christophe Helies

In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #2 | 07/11/19 10:05am

**** ****** ****, *** law **** ****** ***** for *** ******** ****** in ******, ** *** data ********** ******** ** information, ** **** *** CNIL *** ******* ** 1978 **** *** ******* of ********** ********* **** and ********* *** *** about **** **********, ********** public ******* *** ** forth...

******, ** ****** * lot ** ******* *** thinking ** **** ** a **** ** ** the ******** **** *** (ie: "*** ************ ** libertées" ***** ********* ** "law ** *********** ************ and *******") , **** more ******** *** ****.

** **** ****, **** if *** ****** **** physically ******* *** *** working *** ******* ***** have ** **** ***** personnel **** *** ****** is ******* ** *** if **** ******* *** information **** **** ***** would **** *** ***** to ******* *** **** for * **** ***** on *****.

Undisclosed #4

In reply to Christophe Helies | 07/11/19 10:20am

** **** ****, **** if *** ****** **** physically ******* *** *** working *** ******* ***** have ** **** ***** personnel **** *** ****** is ******* ** *** if **** ******* *** information **** **** ***** would **** *** ***** to ******* *** **** for * **** ***** on *****.

** *** **** ***** to ***** *******?

***.

Christophe Helies

07/11/19 10:45am

**** **** *** ***** to ***** ******, *** in ********** ************ *** local *** ***** (********* the ********* *** *** right ** **** ** he's ***** ******* ** no.

** ** **** ********** setting *** ********** ** a ***** ****** ** make *** ********* ***** they *** ***** ************ is ***** ** *.

Undisclosed #4

07/14/19 08:33am

*************** ** ******* ****** GDPR *********?

(*** *** ********, ***** is * **** *********, but **** *** *****).

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Undisclosed #4 | 07/14/19 12:54pm

* **** * *** of *** ******** ** this ***** *** ***** not **** *** **** this *****. *** ***?

Undisclosed #4

In reply to John Honovich | 07/14/19 04:42pm

**. * ***** ***** it’s * ******* ***** by ******* *** ********* the *********** *** ********, and **** ****** ** anonymously ******* **** **** it *** ****** ******* to *******.

********: **** **** ***** to *** ******* ** a ****** ******, ****** a ***** *****?

Charles Rollet

In reply to Undisclosed #4 | 07/15/19 09:22am

*** **** ** ******** data ***** ********* ****** the ** ***** ***** the ****. ** ***, the **** '*******' ** a ***** ***** ** a ******, ** **** as **** ****** ** identifiable *** ** ** the **. *******, **** doesn't **** *** ***** of *** *********** ** somehow ****** ** *** GDPR. *** **** ** very *******-******, ********** ****** * ****** ** situations ***** ********** ** permitted, *********:

********** **necessary *** *** ******** ** *** ********** ********* ******* ** *** ********** or by a third party, except where such interests are overridden by the interests or fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subject which require protection of personal data, in particular where the data subject is a child. [emphasis added]

** *** ******** *** becomes ******* *** "*********** rights *** ********" ** the **** ******* ********* the "********** ********" ** taking *** *****, *.*. ********** cheating.

**** ** * **** a ***** ****** **** any ******** ********* *** legality ** *** ***********'* photo ***** ** ******** not ** ************ *** GDPR *** ** ********* to ******'* ******** ******* laws. ****** ******* ******** ********* ********** ****** ** someone ******* ***** *******. For *******, ***** *** Paris ******* **** ******** of ****, * *** pictured ******* *** ************* *** *************** *** **** the *******, ****** ****** privacy ****; *** **** was*********, ** *** ***** was ********** **** ** legitimate *************.

** *********, *** ***** case **** ** *** grandmaster (** ** ****) would **** ****** **** on *************** ** ******** French ******* **** - which ******* ********* ***** types ** ********** - rather **** *** **** itself.

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Charles Rollet | 07/15/19 12:59pm

*******, **** *******!

** ***** **** *** American ***********, * ***** the ******** / ******* would ** ******* ** a ****** ** * bathroom *****, ** ***, where ** ** *********, at *****, ********* ** be *** ******. *** example, *** **** *** in **** ******** *** what **** *** **** camera ********? * ** not **** **** **** come **** **** ** this ****, **** *** admission ** ********, *** it ** * ****** stunning ****** ** *** up * ****** ** someone ****** * ******** stall.

Read this IPVM report for free.

This article is part of IPVM's 6,438 reports, 865 tests and is only available to members. To get a one-time preview of our work, enter your work email to access the full article.