Data Disposal Takes on New Urgency with Impending GDPR
A Legalweek panel of information governance professionals explain how under the GDPR, the 'whole game is changing' for data deletion.
February 05, 2018 at 10:09 AM
3 minute read
For the most part, corporations across various industries have been able to figure out how they can defensively dispose of the data held in their offices. Generally, “you know what your legal and regulatory obligations are for a certain set of information, and you know what your legal hold obligations are,” says Jason Stearns, director of the legal and compliance group at BlackRock.
But the way such criteria is applied will likely change in the near future. At the “Making Disposition Defensible: The Tools You Need” Legalweek 2018 session, Stearns joined other information governance professionals in discussing how the European Union's (EU) General Protection Data Regulation (GDPR) will turn defensible disposition considerations on its head.
“I like to think that the whole game is changing,” said Richard Kessler, director of cybersecurity services and strategy at KPMG, noting that the GDPR mandates that companies can only store the personally identifiable information (PII) of EU citizens for as long as it satisfies the primary business purposes for which it was collected.
Kessler added, “For years we were focused [on data] at the end of its lifecycle: What is preventing us from disposing of it? What is occurring now [with the GDPR] is changing the focus to the front of the lifecycle… it really pushes the thoughts around disposition, in particular with the right to erasure, to the very beginning of the lifecycle when data is first created or received.”
John Isaza, partner at law firm Rimon PC, added that among his clients “personal data is, by far, their number one concern” because of the GDPR.
Indeed, the EU regulation is already spurring some information governance consultants to advise their clients to take a more proactive approach to data deletion. “Now, I can go to my business group and say, 'Unless you can tell me why you need this data, if it has PII in it,” it has to be erased, said Stearns. “I can speak to deleting tens of thousands of backup tapes with that approach alone.”
But erasing PII data that is no longer needed for a business purpose isn't always going to be possible with such quick and broad strokes. Kessler noted that for some companies, it will require “micro-surgery” in finding “where is that PPI information is, and where it has gone throughout the enterprise.”
To be sure, companies may not always be willing to delete the PII data they collect and store once it is no longer needed for its primary business function. “Those doing the data analytics may say, 'Hey we want to keep this data round, we want to see trends over years' or something like that,” Kessler said.
Under the GDPR, however, companies will likely need to get consent from EU citizens whose PII they want to keep and analyze. But Stearns believes that some companies will lean on data analytics as a reason to hold off on erasing any data entirely.
“Big data, artificial intelligence, analytics—these keep being reasons used to do nothing,” he said, adding “you don't need to keep every data set” for analytics.
“Do I need three copies to run data analytics? No… I also don't need physical files in the warehouse that are useless in a data analytics scenario.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1Supreme Court Considers Reviving Lawsuit Over Fatal Traffic Stop Shooting
- 2Long Hours and Lack Of Boundaries: Associates In India Are Leaving Their Firms
- 3Goodwin Procter Relocates to Renewable-Powered Office in San Francisco’s Financial District
- 4'Didn't Notice Patient Wasn't Breathing': $13.7M Verdict Against Anesthesiologists
- 5'Astronomical' Interest Rates: $1B Settlement to Resolve Allegations of 'Predatory' Lending Cancels $534M in Small-Business Debts
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250