Article Index

Complete catalog of all Knowledge Base articles. Articles are TypeScript modules exporting KBArticle objects, organized by category.


b2b-enrichment/

FieldValue
IDb2b-enrichment-legitimate-interest
TitleLegitimate Interest as Legal Basis for B2B Data Enrichment (Art. 6(1)(f))
Applicability🇪🇺 EU
Last Updated2025-01-15

Key Points:

  • Deep analysis of the three-part legitimate interest test: Purpose, Necessity, Balancing
  • B2B professional context reduces privacy expectations (strongest factor favoring LI)
  • Public registry data (Bolagsverket, SCB) easily passes necessity test
  • Industry comparators: Bisnode, Dun & Bradstreet, LinkedIn Sales Navigator
  • Clear red lines where LI fails: biometric data, location tracking, inference of special categories
  • References Clearview AI enforcement (€100M+ in fines across EU) as the canonical failure case

Legal References:

  • GDPR Art. 6(1)(f), Recital 47
  • EDPB Guidelines 06/2020
  • WP29 Opinion 06/2014
  • UODO Bisnode decision (ZSPR.421.2.2019, 2019)
  • Clearview AI: CNIL MED-2022-001, ICO UKN_532498

Article 14 Notification Obligations (art14-obligations.ts)

FieldValue
IDb2b-enrichment-art14-obligations
TitleArticle 14 Notification Obligations for Enriched Contacts
Applicability🇪🇺 EU
Last Updated2025-01-15

Key Points:

  • Art. 14 applies to virtually all B2B enrichment data (indirect collection)
  • Nine mandatory disclosure items must be provided to data subjects
  • Timing: within one month of collection, or at first communication, or before disclosure — whichever is earliest
  • The Bisnode case (UODO Poland, 2019) established that the Art. 14(5)(b) “disproportionate effort” exemption is narrow — if you have email addresses, you must use them
  • Practical notification email format and content requirements
  • Deduplication, bounce handling, and logging requirements

Legal References:

  • GDPR Art. 12, 14, 14(5)(b), 21
  • EDPB Guidelines 2/2018 on Transparency
  • UODO Decision ZSPR.421.2.2019 (Bisnode Poland)
  • IMY Guidance on Art. 14 Obligations

Data Minimisation and Purpose Limitation (data-minimization.ts)

FieldValue
IDb2b-enrichment-data-minimization
TitleData Minimisation and Purpose Limitation in B2B Enrichment (Art. 5(1)(b) and 5(1)(c))
Applicability🇪🇺 EU
Last Updated2025-01-15

Key Points:

  • Five data tiers analyzed for minimisation:
    • Tier 0 (Registry data): Clearly necessary — public by Swedish law
    • Tier 1 (Validation scores): Low risk derived data
    • Tier 2 (Digital footprint): Borderline — watch sole traders and social media linkage
    • Tier 3 (Contact data): Most sensitive — strict field/role/source limitation required
    • Tier 4 (Market intelligence): Highest aggregation risk — LinkedIn + news mentions create professional dossiers
  • The “aggregation problem”: combining innocuous data points creates intrusive profiles
  • Purpose limitation: derived scores must not be repurposed for credit risk or pricing

Legal References:

  • GDPR Art. 5(1)(b), 5(1)(c), 9, 25
  • EDPB Guidelines on Automated Decision-Making (WP251)
  • WP29 Opinion 06/2014
  • Aktiebolagslagen (2005:551)
  • IMY Guidance on Data Minimisation

Retention Periods (retention-limits.ts)

FieldValue
IDb2b-enrichment-retention-limits
TitleRetention Periods for B2B Enrichment Data
Applicability🇪🇺 EU
Last Updated2025-01-15

Key Points:

  • Registry data: Quarterly refresh; delete if not refreshed within 6 months
  • Contact data (Tier 3): 12–24 months from last verification; 12 months default, 24 months only with active engagement
  • RoPA logs: Minimum 3 years
  • Opt-out hashes: Indefinite retention (legally required to prevent re-processing)
  • Art. 14 notification logs: 3 years
  • Automated retention enforcement is mandatory — IMY requires technical implementation, not just policy
  • BullMQ cron job pattern for scheduled deletion with audit trail

Legal References:

  • GDPR Art. 5(1)(e), 17, 21, 30
  • EDPB Guidelines 2/2018
  • IMY Retention Guidance
  • Handelsregisterlagen (1974:157)

gdpr/

Article 6 — Legal Bases (article-6.ts)

FieldValue
IDgdpr/article-6
TitleGDPR Article 6: Legal Bases for Processing — Deep Dive for B2B Enrichment
Applicability🇪🇺 EU
Last Updated2025-01-15

Key Points:

  • Exhaustive analysis of all six legal bases with focus on why consent fails for B2B enrichment at scale
  • Contract basis (Art. 6(1)(b)) only applies where the natural person is the contractual counterparty
  • Legitimate interest (Art. 6(1)(f)) is the only practical basis — requires documented three-part test
  • EDPB Guidelines 06/2020 (draft 2024) clarify LI must be “real and present,” not hypothetical
  • IMY’s 2025 written LIA requirement: absence of documented LIA is treated as evidence of inadequate compliance
  • Red flags that cause LI to fail: no LIA, Art. 9 data, no opt-out, bulk resale without purpose limitation

Legal References:

  • GDPR Art. 4(11), 5(1)(a), 6(1), 7, 9, 21
  • EDPB Guidelines 06/2020, 05/2020, 02/2019
  • UODO Bisnode decision (ZSOŚS.440.748.2019)
  • IMY Guidance on Legitimate Interest

Articles 13 and 14 — Transparency (article-13-14.ts)

FieldValue
IDgdpr/article-13-14
TitleGDPR Articles 13 and 14: Transparency Obligations for Data Enrichment Platforms
Applicability🇪🇺 EU
Last Updated2025-01-15

Key Points:

  • Core distinction: Art. 13 = direct collection; Art. 14 = indirect collection (enrichment scenario)
  • Nine mandatory disclosure items under Art. 14(1) and 14(2)
  • Three timing triggers under Art. 14(3): one-month rule, first communication, first disclosure
  • Bisnode case (UODO, 2019): 6.4M records, ordered to notify 5.7M people individually, fined for claiming disproportionate effort
  • Practical Art. 14 notification email template with all required elements
  • RoPA, LIA, and Art. 14 notice must be consistent — inconsistency is a compliance failure

Legal References:

  • GDPR Art. 12, 13, 14, 14(5)(b), 30
  • UODO Decision ZSOŚS.440.748.2019
  • EDPB Guidelines 01/2022, WP260
  • IMY Guidance on Articles 13 and 14

Article 30 — Records of Processing Activities (article-30.ts)

FieldValue
IDgdpr/article-30
TitleGDPR Article 30: Records of Processing Activities (RoPA) for B2B Enrichment
Applicability🇪🇺 EU
Last Updated2025-01-15

Key Points:

  • Art. 30(5) exception (under 250 employees) does not apply to enrichment platforms — three conditions all fail
  • Model RoPA structure with 5 example activities: Bolagsverket ingestion, website scraping, data export, opt-out register, client account management
  • Electronic RoPA must be version-controlled, linked to LIA/privacy notice, with named owners
  • IMY requests RoPA first in audits — incomplete RoPA is an immediate compliance finding
  • Processor RoPA (Art. 30(2)) is separate from controller RoPA

Legal References:

  • GDPR Art. 5(2), 30, 33
  • IMY RoPA Guidance
  • CNIL Practical Guide
  • EDPB Accountability and Governance Guidelines

GDPR Overview (overview.ts)

FieldValue
IDgdpr/overview
TitleGDPR Overview: Scope, Definitions, and Application to B2B Data Enrichment
Applicability🇪🇺 EU
Last Updated2025-01-15

Key Points:

  • Territorial scope: establishment principle (Art. 3(1)) applies to Swedish-domiciled platforms
  • Personal data definition (Art. 4(1)): captures sole traders, named directors, direct-dial business contacts
  • Recital 14: Legal entities are NOT data subjects — company name, org nr, SNI codes fall outside GDPR
  • Six legal bases overview table with applicability to enrichment
  • Data subject rights most relevant to enrichment: access (Art. 15), erasure (Art. 17), objection (Art. 21)
  • IMY fine regime: up to €20M or 4% of worldwide turnover for serious infringements
  • Dataskyddslagen national adaptations: personnummer restriction, freedom of expression carve-outs

Legal References:

  • GDPR Recital 1, 4, 14; Art. 1–4, 6, 12–22, 51, 58, 83
  • Dataskyddslagen (2018:218)
  • IMY Guidance on Personal Data

enforcement/

IMY Decisions (imy-decisions.ts)

FieldValue
IDenforcement-imy-decisions
TitleSwedish IMY: Structure, Enforcement Powers, and Key Decisions (2019–2025)
Applicability🇸🇪 Sweden
Last Updated2025-01-15

Key Points:

  • IMY enforcement powers under Art. 58: audits, warnings, reprimands, processing bans, fines up to €20M/4%
  • Key decisions timeline:
    • 2020: Google — SEK 75M (~€7M) for Art. 17 de-listing failures
    • 2021: Healthcare analytics — SEK 16M total for Art. 9/28 violations
    • 2022: Klarna — SEK 7.5M for Art. 13 transparency failures
    • 2024: Recruiting companies — SEK 2.1M and 3.4M for minimisation and transparency failures
  • 2025 Written LIA Requirement: IMY requires documented, activity-specific LIAs with 7 minimum elements
  • Investigation procedure: “begäran om yttrande” (request for statement) → 30-day response → assessment → draft decision
  • Current priorities: AI/automated decision-making, cookie consent, data broker sector, DPAs, international transfers
  • Cooperation with IMY reduces fines; obstruction is an aggravating factor

Legal References:

  • GDPR Art. 51, 56, 57, 58, 60, 77, 83
  • Lag (2018:218)
  • Förvaltningslagen (2017:900)
  • IMY Annual Reports 2019–2024

swedish-law/

Bolagsverket (bolagsverket.ts)

FieldValue
IDswedish-law/bolagsverket
TitleBolagsverket: Public Registry Data, Bulk Access, and Lawful Enrichment Use
Applicability🇸🇪 Sweden
Last Updated2025-01-15

Key Points:

  • Bolagsverket maintains registries for AB, HB, KB, enskild firma, filial, stiftelser, SE, SCE
  • Public access principle (Tryckfrihetsförordningen 2 kap.) makes most registered documents public
  • Permissible fields: org nr, company name, address, SNI codes, status, board names, VD, signatories, annual reports
  • Personnummer restriction: Full personnummer not in standard FTF bulk feed; Dataskyddslagen Ch. 3 § 10 requires “clearly justified” reason
  • FTF bulk data terms: require current data, prohibit raw redistribution, allow value-added products
  • SNI codes are legal entity metadata — entirely outside GDPR scope
  • Six-step lawful use framework: obtain legitimately → separate entity/personal data → apply GDPR basis → exclude personnummer → maintain accuracy → document in RoPA

Legal References:

  • Aktiebolagslagen (2005:551)
  • Handelsregisterlagen (1974:157)
  • Tryckfrihetsförordningen 2 kap.
  • Bolagsverket FTF Terms
  • Lag om registrering av verkliga huvudmän (2017:631)
  • SCB SNI 2007 (NACE Rev. 2)

Dataskyddslagen (dataskyddslagen.ts)

FieldValue
IDswedish-law/dataskyddslagen
TitleDataskyddslagen (2018:218): Sweden’s National GDPR Supplement
Applicability🇸🇪 Sweden
Last Updated2025-01-15

Key Points:

  • Supplementary law exercising Member State derogations under Arts 6(2), 9(4), Chapter IX
  • Personnummer (Ch. 3 § 10): may only be processed when “clearly justified” by purpose, identification necessity, or weighty reason
  • Freedom of expression (Ch. 4): extraordinarily broad exemption for journalistic/academic/artistic/literary purposes — but commercial enrichment cannot claim it
  • Criminal record data (Ch. 3 §§ 5–9): prohibited for commercial enrichment; civil/regulatory sanctions in public records are distinguishable
  • IMY procedural powers: on-site inspections, binding orders, administrative fees (sanktionsavgifter)
  • Adjacent laws: Kreditupplysningslagen (credit reporting), Marknadsföringslagen (marketing transparency)
  • Offentlighetsprincipen enables collection but does not override GDPR for commercial processing

Legal References:

  • Dataskyddslagen (2018:218)
  • Tryckfrihetsförordningen (1949:105)
  • Yttrandefrihetsgrundlagen
  • Kreditupplysningslagen (1973:1173)
  • Marknadsföringslagen (2008:486)
  • IMY Guidance on Personnummer

Legacy Articles (kb/index.ts)

The legacy article registry (src/kb/index.ts) contains 10 additional articles that provide complementary coverage:

IDTitleCategoryApplicability
gdpr/article-6GDPR Article 6 — Lawfulness of Processinggdpr🇪🇺 EU
gdpr/article-14GDPR Article 14 — Transparency for Indirectly Obtained Datagdpr🇪🇺 EU
gdpr/article-17GDPR Article 17 — Right to Erasuregdpr🇪🇺 EU
swedish-law/dataskyddslagenThe Swedish Data Protection Act (Dataskyddslagen)swedish-law🇸🇪 Sweden
swedish-law/imy-supervisionIMY — The Swedish Data Protection Authorityswedish-law🇸🇪 Sweden
b2b-enrichment/legitimate-interest-assessmentConducting a Legitimate Interest Assessment (LIA)b2b-enrichment🇸🇪 Sweden
b2b-enrichment/data-sourcesPermissible Data Sources for Swedish B2B Enrichmentb2b-enrichment🇸🇪 Sweden
enforcement/imy-fines-2023-2024IMY Enforcement Actions 2023–2024: Key Decisionsenforcement🇸🇪 Sweden
templates/art14-noticeTemplate: Article 14 Notification Emailtemplates🇸🇪 Sweden
templates/dpa-templateTemplate: Data Processing Agreement (DPA)templates🇪🇺 EU

Citation Credibility Tiers

All citations in KB articles are tagged with a credibility tier:

TierScoreColorExamples
authoritative95GreenIMY, EDPB, EUR-Lex, Riksdagen, Bolagsverket, SCB
official78BlueEuropa.eu, UODO, Garante, CNIL, ICO
practitioner62AmberGDPR.eu, gdprhub.eu, law.cornell.edu, SSRN
uncertain15–42RedReuters, FT, BBC, SVT, tech blogs

See src/lib/credibility.ts for the full domain scoring logic.

See also