FootballTV does not have to pay a fine for processing personal data. The Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens imposed the fine of 575,000 euros in 2020 because, according to the authority, VoetbalTV does not have a "legitimate interest" in processing the data. That would violate the General Data Protection Regulation. However, in a ruling today (July 27, 2022), the Administrative Law Division of the Raad van State ruled that the authority imposed this fine on incorrect grounds.
FootballTV is cooperation between Talpa and the KNVB in the form of a video platform that makes video recordings of matches in amateur soccer on behalf of soccer clubs. The recording and distribution of video footage by VoetbalTV is a processing of the personal data of (underage) athletes to which the General Data Protection Regulation (AVG) applies.
The AVG states that in order to process personal data, there must be a "legitimate interest. According to the Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens (AP), a 'legitimate interest' is an interest that follows from the law. FootballTV's interest, according to the AP, is purely commercial in nature. The processing therefore violates the AVG.
According to FootballTV, a "legitimate interest" is any interest that does not conflict with the law. According to FootballTV, it not only has a commercial interest in data processing, but also ensures that it increases the involvement and enjoyment of soccer fans. Moreover, FootballTV facilitates the performance of technical analysis by coaches and analysts and provides the option for players, friends and family members to watch (back) matches remotely.
The central question in this case is what exactly constitutes a legitimate interest and under what conditions the processing of personal data for that purpose is lawful. The Administrative Law Division is of the opinion that it is up to the organization processing the personal data to indicate what its interests are in doing so and why the processing of those data is necessary for that purpose. It is then up to the AP to assess what the organization actually does, whether that corresponds to the stated interests and whether those interests are served by the data processing and whether those interests are justified.
The AP erred in not including in its assessment all the interests presented by FootballTV. Had the AP done so, the authority should have concluded that FootballTV does not have an exclusively commercial interest in making footage of soccer matches. Also, the AP did not assess whether the processing of personal data is necessary and did not weigh the interests of FootballTV on the one hand and the interests of the data subjects on the other. For this reason, the fine was thus unjustly imposed. This means that FootballTV does not have to pay the fine.
