1. As is well known, on June 5, 2018, the ECJ ruled con­tra­ry to the pre­vious instances in the mat­ter of Face­book Fan­pages fol­lo­wing a refer­ral by the Ger­man Fede­ral Admi­ni­stra­ti­ve Court (Rs. C‑210/16) that the ope­ra­tor of a Face­book Fan­page joint­ly respon­si­ble with Face­book becau­se the ope­ra­tor influen­ces through sui­ta­ble set­tings which per­so­nal data is Face­book coll­ects and pro­ce­s­ses data from the visi­tors to the fan page, among other things in order to pro­vi­de the ope­ra­tor with anony­mi­zed eva­lua­tions. This ruling is explo­si­ve not so much becau­se of Fan­pages, but becau­se it signi­fi­cant­ly expands the scope of joint respon­si­bi­li­ty by making it clear,
  • that also a very limi­t­ed co-deter­mi­na­ti­on of a com­pa­ny is suf­fi­ci­ent, to estab­lish joint respon­si­bi­li­ty (becau­se “joint” does not mean “equal”), and
  • that also the one can have a com­mon respon­si­bi­li­ty who is no access at all to the per­so­nal data in que­sti­on and does not neces­s­a­ri­ly pro­cess them hims­elf (as long as he only influen­ces the pur­po­ses or means of the pro­ce­s­sing). This is rele­vant, for exam­p­le, in the case of joint­ly used but cli­ent-sepa­ra­ted systems within the group.

In prac­ti­ce, this rai­ses the que­sti­on of what space is left at all for sepa­ra­te respon­si­bi­li­ty and com­mis­sio­ned pro­ce­s­sing rela­ti­on­ships, along with a num­ber of Fol­low-up que­sti­ons (e.g.: Can a Swiss com­pa­ny be joint­ly respon­si­ble within the mea­ning of the GDPR if it is not its­elf sub­ject to the GDPR [pro­ba­b­ly no; on the other hand, accor­ding to the ECJ ruling, its own data pro­ce­s­sing – for which the appli­ca­bi­li­ty of the GDPR would have to be exami­ned – is appar­ent­ly not requi­red]; is the exch­an­ge of data bet­ween joint­ly respon­si­ble per­sons pri­vi­le­ged, so that a sepa­ra­te legal basis for the exch­an­ge is not requi­red; how are agree­ments bet­ween the joint­ly respon­si­ble per­sons to be structured?V. within the mea­ning of Art. 26 GDPR; what is to be sta­ted in data pro­tec­tion decla­ra­ti­ons in this regard [e.g., a link on the fan page to a data pro­tec­tion decla­ra­ti­on in which the topic of fan pages is cover­ed as well as pos­si­ble makes sen­se]; how is joint respon­si­bi­li­ty to be depic­ted in intra-group data exch­an­ge agree­ments, etc.).

On Sep­tem­ber 5, 2018, the Ger­man Data Pro­tec­tion Con­fe­rence sub­se­quent­ly issued a Decis­i­on taken:

Wit­hout agree­ment accor­ding to Art. 26 DSGVO is the ope­ra­ti­on of a fan page as curr­ent­ly offe­red by Face­book, unlawful. The­r­e­fo­re, the DSK demands that the requi­re­ments of data pro­tec­tion law are now met when ope­ra­ting fan pages. This inclu­des, in par­ti­cu­lar, that the joint­ly respon­si­ble par­ties crea­te cla­ri­ty about the cur­rent fac­tu­al situa­ti­on and pro­vi­de the requi­red infor­ma­ti­on to the affec­ted per­sons (= visi­tors to the fan page).
Howe­ver, shared respon­si­bi­li­ty also means that Fan Page ope­ra­tors (whe­ther public or non-public) must Lega­li­ty of the data pro­ce­s­sing for which they are joint­ly respon­si­ble, and this pro­ve can. In addi­ti­on, data sub­jects can exer­cise their rights under the GDPR with and vis-à-vis any per­son respon­si­ble (Artic­le 26 (3) of the GDPR).
In par­ti­cu­lar, the com­pa­nies listed in the annex Que­sti­ons must the­r­e­fo­re Ans­we­red by both Face­book and and fan page ope­ra­tors. can be.

Face­book has now, on Sep­tem­ber 11, 2018, alre­a­dy sub­mit­ted an agree­ment within the mea­ning of Artic­le 26 of the GDPR that was crea­ted under time pres­su­re (“Page Insights Con­trol­ler Adden­dum”), inclu­ding the following:

Face­book Ire­land Limi­t­ed (“Face­book Ire­land”) and you are joint con­trol­lers for the pro­ce­s­sing of Insights Data.

[…] Face­book Ire­land agrees to take pri­ma­ry respon­si­bi­li­ty under the GDPR for the pro­ce­s­sing of Insights Data and to com­ply with all appli­ca­ble obli­ga­ti­ons under GDPR with respect to the pro­ce­s­sing of Insights Data […]. Face­book Ire­land will also make the essence of this Page Insights Adden­dum available to data subjects. […] You agree that only Face­book Ire­land may take and imple­ment decis­i­ons about the pro­ce­s­sing of Insights Data.

Face­book Ire­land deci­des in its sole dis­creti­on how to com­ply with its obli­ga­ti­ons under this Page Insights Addendum. […] […] 

If you are cont­ac­ted by data sub­jects or a super­vi­so­ry aut­ho­ri­ty under the GDPR with regard to the pro­ce­s­sing of Insights Data and the obli­ga­ti­ons assu­med by Face­book Ire­land under this Page Insights Adden­dum (each a “Request”), you will for­ward all rele­vant infor­ma­ti­on to us prompt­ly but within a maxi­mum of 7 calen­dar days.

[…] You agree to take all rea­sonable endea­vours in a time­ly man­ner to coope­ra­te with us in ans­we­ring any such Request. […].
[…]

Facebook’s assump­ti­on of pri­ma­ry respon­si­bi­li­ty is undoub­ted­ly a reli­ef for page ope­ra­tors. It also shows once again that joint respon­si­bi­li­ty need by no means be an equal respon­si­bi­li­ty. Nevert­hel­ess, fan page ope­ra­tors are recom­men­ded to con­ti­n­ue to refer to their own pri­va­cy poli­cy and to refer the­re, for exam­p­le, to the legal basis for the use of the fan page (e.g., to their legi­ti­ma­te inte­rest).