Spain’s data protection authority has ordered Worldcoin to temporarily stop collecting and processing personal data from the market. It must also stop processing any data it previously collected there. The controversial, Sam Altman-founded eyeball-scanning blockchain crypto project started operations in the market last July, as part of a global rollout.
Key Takeaway
Spain’s data protection authority has ordered Worldcoin to temporarily stop collecting and processing personal data from the market due to privacy concerns, in accordance with GDPR regulations.
Privacy Concerns Lead to Temporary Ban
The Spanish Data Protection Agency (AEPD) has ordered a precautionary measure against Tools for Humanity Corporation to cease the collection and processing of personal data that it is carrying out in Spain within the framework of its Worldcoin project, and to proceed to block the already collected data. This decision is based on exceptional circumstances, in which it is necessary and proportionate to adopt provisional measures aimed at the immediate cessation of this processing of personal data, preventing its possible transfer to third parties and safeguarding the fundamental right to personal data protection.
GDPR Regulations and Controversy
The GDPR regulates how EU people’s personal data can be processed and requires entities handling information such as people’s names, contact details, biometrics and other identifiers to have a valid legal basis for their operations. Violations of the regime can attract fines of up to 4% of global annual turnover. Data protection authorities can also demand unlawful processing to stop, including temporarily if they are concerned people’s rights are at serious risk, as is happening here.
Worldcoin’s Response and Global Impact
Worldcoin’s regional rollout quickly attracted scrutiny from European privacy regulators. An investigation was opened by France’s data protection authority last year. The fact that Spain’s authority has felt the need to take unilateral action to protect local users suggests differences of opinion among DPAs about the best course of action to take. It may also be concerned about the length of time it’s taking the Bavarian authority to conclude its probe.
