Certain metadata processed by service providers are needed to effectively fight crime. Since no EU-wide legal framework exists requiring providers to retain metadata for a reasonable and limited period of time for criminal proceedings, data may no longer exist by the time authorities request them. The divergences between EU Member States’ laws governing the retention of data can hamper criminal proceedings and affect service providers operating across the EU. This initiative is to assess the impact of data retention rules at EU level.
You must log in or register to comment.
🫡
Feedback period
21 May 2025 - 18 June 2025 (midnight Brussels time)The Commission would like to hear your views.
This call for evidence is open for feedback. Your input will be taken into account as we further develop and fine-tune this initiative. Feedback received will be published on this site and therefore must adhere to the feedback rules.
And a big friendly button to click.
A bit of misunderstanding the urgency of the situation to not call it straight mass surveillance in the title to bring more attention to it not to say about the built-in backdoors as well
Perhaps, but I didn’t want to sensationalize it.
It’d not be sensationalization if it is needed such due highlightning of troubling risks and they are very real threats being openly discussed
The divergences between EU Member States’ laws governing the retention of data can hamper criminal proceedings and affect service providers operating across the EU.
I’m positively disconsolate over the revelation that law enforcement can, at times, be inconvenient.
I fully agree that a universal retention policy for member states would be sensible, but I also suspect they won’t like the retention time I’m suggesting.
Did my part. This is madness.
