C015 Spotify

Main reason to do so: noyb is not a party to the proceeding

noyb seeks update with the DSB

back and forth between noyb and IMY.

Does this mean that our complaint is not being handled by the Swedish DPA but that a general audit of Spotify's policies, indepedent of our complaint, is being conducted instead?

In June 2019 the Swedish DPA initiated an audit as regards Spotify and how they handle data subjectsrequests pursuant to the right of access. The audit was initiated due to complaints concerning Spotify. The audit however focus on the general policies of the company in relation to the right of access and not on how the company has handled the specific request made by the complainants. Spotify has submitted an opinion on the 31th of July 2019, and a supplementing opinion on the 15th of November 2019. The Swedish DPA has not yet issued a decision in the case.

Following our previous update request the DSB informs us that they have forwarded the question to IMY and were told that the Swedish supervisory authority is conducting an ongoing investigation into spotify's guidelines with regard to the right of access.

The procedure initiated at the same time to determine the lead supervisory authority (Art. 56 DSGVO) has shown that the Swedish supervisory authority (Data Inspection Board) will act as the supervisory authority in this case. The Swedish supervisory authority has initiated investigations (audit) against the respondent.

noyb requests whether a decision on the LSA has been reached

The DSB stays the procedure while the LSA has been identified.

Complainant claims violation of Article 15 GDPR due to incomplete response provided by the controller.