Erdos indicates that
notwithstanding the apparent breath of the European Court of Justice’s 2008 Satamedia judgment, the scope of this provision remains highly opaque and confused. This has led courts and regulators alike to find this ‘special purposes’ Article inapplicable when large databases of information are disseminated, when data is communicated to essentially privatized individuals, even if indeterminate in number, and when the processing includes a purpose other than journalism, literature and art. Since Member States have almost exclusively relied on this provision to reconcile Data Protection (DP) and free speech, a wide variety of expressive activity, including rating websites, mapping services, search engines, academic research, socio-political speech and social networking, are subject to onerous standards in the general data protection (DP) scheme.
The ‘special purposes’ provision in the proposed European Data Protection Regulation (COM (2012) 11 Final) must be revised so as to clearly and explicitly protect all activities orientated to disseminating information, opinions or ideas for the benefit of the public collectively. In addition, Member States should deploy more limited derogations available in the interests of the ‘rights and freedoms of others’ to protect activities which merely, but importantly, facilitate public expression (for example, search engines) or which promote individual self-expression (for example, social networking).
Nevertheless, to properly balance the competing values in this area, it is essential that such an expansion be coupled with measures specifying in a more unambiguous fashion the requirement that all derogations be truly proportionate in relation to the various rights and interests involved.