Germany · de.indymedia · · 1h
Digital expropriation: Data protection advocates warn against blanket permission for AI training
Deutsch (original) · Auto-translated to English
In the future, corporations would be able to use Europeans’ data for AI training even more easily than before. Max Schrems and the noyb organization warn against this scenario. What is supposed to help the European economy would ultimately benefit US companies in particular.
The debate about the data omnibus is picking up speed again after the parliamentary summer break. In addition to questions as far-reaching as that of a possiblehttps://netzpolitik.org/2026/digitaler-omnibus-neues-buendnis-will-das-e...of cookie bannersand the definition of personal data, the idea of making it easier for companies to train AI systems is now circulating again. Thehttps://noyb.eu/de/ai-eu-member-states-plan-digital-expropriation-europe...noyb warns: The use of personal data for AI systems could soon be permitted across the board, without consent or balancing of interests in individual cases.
The reason for the warning is a compromise proposal from the Irish Council Presidency of September 3, 2026https://pro.politico.eu/news/223891">Politico(€)recently leaked. This takes up a proposal for the legal basis for AI training that the EU Commission made in itshttps://netzpolitik.org/2025/faq-zum-digitalen-omnibus-was-plant-die-eu-...for the data omnibushad made. Cyprus deleted it during the Council Presidency in the first half of the year, but now it is back.
According to him, the use of personal data for this purpose should generally be considered a “legitimate interest”. This means that tech companies do not have to obtain explicit and informed consent from users. Powerful member states like Germany were loudhttps://www.sueddeutsche.de/dossier/tiefgaenge/ki-training-in-europa-wie...Digital transition (€)advocated for the regulation because it could help European AI companies.
Max Schrems, chairman of noyb, vehemently contradicts this: “The proposal makes it clear that the interests of AI companies should be given priority over the fundamental right to data protection in the future.” This is “nothing other than the digital expropriation of Europeans”. The “abolition of data protection” for AI would primarily benefit large tech companies that have already collected comprehensive data. “This is the complete release of European data to global corporations.”
–––
The hut is on fire! We're going in.
We oppose fascisation. We fight for a free, open and solidarity-based society. We defend basic rights for everyone.https://netzpolitik.org/spenden/?via=rss">Thisonly possible with your support.
–––
AI companies need large amounts of data
The data omnibus is part of a larger simplification and deregulation agenda of the EU Commission. After environmental reporting requirements have already been cut and AI rules have been weakened, among other things, the data omnibus is axing the General Data Protection Regulation. The collective law is intended, among other things, to bundle several EU data usage laws and standardize reporting channels for data breaches, which is largely undisputed. However, the omnibus is also intended to make extensive changes to the GDPR for the first time.
Among other things, this should help the development of AI systems that require large amounts of data to function. AI companies like OpenAI had already admitted in the past that they simply used data from the Internet for this purpose, including massive amountshttps://www.zeit.de/digital/internet/2025-03/meta-illegale-quelle-sprac...protected material, but alsohttps://www.businessinsider.com/reddit-comments-ai-training-models-googl...orhttps://www.techspot.com/news/108391-youtube-creators-unaware-google-use...with personal data.
Even he himself knew that this could in principle be legal under data protection law even without the explicit consent of those affectedhttps://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/edpb-opinion-on-ai-models-gdpr-principle...European Data Protection Committeesaid. In addition to consent, the GDPR also provides for other possible legal bases, such as the so-called balancing of interests. However, it is legally controversial that the balance between the economic interests of companies and the protection interests of users would actually always be in favor of the former.
For example, Professor Paulina Jo Pesch was in onehttps://netzpolitik.org/2025/datenschutz-und-ki-klusiv-mit-der-zoegerli...on netzpolitik.orgargues that this is contradicted by the lack of transparency in the processing processes. After all, it is unclear to everyone involved what exactlyhttps://netzpolitik.org/2025/privatsphaere-duerfen-wir-ihre-informatione...what happens to their data and where they appear again, when fed into AI systems.
“Virtually unlimited use of all data for AI”
Max Schrems and noyb are, among other things, bothered by the fact that the Irish Council Presidency's proposal is too general. The proposed Article 88bis (formerly: 88c) legitimizes any type of artificial intelligence, regardless of the purpose for which it is used. “The article could also allow, for example, the training and use of AI for manipulation, disinformation or killer drones – and thus go far beyond the previously legal use.”
–––
The work of netzpolitik.org is financed by donations from our readers.
Become part of this unique community and support our public interest-oriented, advertising- and tracking-free journalismhttps://netzpolitik.org/spenden/?via=rss">nowwith a donation.
–––
It is “blatantly absurd to privilege a high-risk technology over any traditional computer system,” Schrems continued. “We have been promising people since the 80s that large corporations have the data, but are only allowed to use it to a limited extent.” Article 88bis “opens the floodgates and allows virtually unlimited use of all data for AI.”
Noyb also warns about other aspects of the data omnibus. A new definition of personal data could potentially exclude pseudonymized data from the scope of the GDPR. This could mean that even invasive online tracking is no longer covered by data protection. Other important data protection officers, such as the Berlin data protection officer, had also warned against the step. The EU is currently shaking things uphttps://netzpolitik.org/2026/digitaler-omnibus-die-eu-kommission-ruettel...“Fundamental pillars of European data protection”said Kamp.
–––
The work of netzpolitik.org is financed by donations from our readers.
Become part of this unique community and support our public interest-oriented, advertising- and tracking-free journalismhttps://netzpolitik.org/spenden/?via=rss">nowwith a donation.
Read the full story at the source
Source: de.indymedia