Europe's digital economy should become an ecosystem of fair digital value creation in international competition.

The decisive factor here is the legal framework.

In addition to the "Data Governance Act" with the "Data Act" and the AI ​​regulation, laws are currently being created that are aimed at the transfer and use of data for the benefit of society, the economy and the state.

In them, data protection is not a brake on economic development, but an integral part of the legal framework.

It is also undeniable: "Big Data" and AI applications require the marketability of data.

And: Competitors from America and China have so far dominated the European market.

They actually set the standards and provide the platforms.

If Europe's digital economy is to hold its own in international competition, several factors must work together.

These nine points are crucial:

1. Understand the GDPR as the economic constitution of the internal data market

The GDPR is more than "just" a data protection regulation, it is the core of the "economic constitution of the internal data market".

Article 1 GDPR and its recital 4 not only protect natural persons in the processing of personal data, they also expressly protect the "free movement of such data".

For reasons of data protection, this may not be restricted or prohibited in the EU.

At the same time, the GDPR provides the legal basis for legitimate data processing.

These are the pursuit of interests-based purposes, contracts for data transfer and voluntary and informed consent.

The directive for digital content implemented in the German Civil Code has consistently declared data to be an asset.

The data law currently emerging in the EU expands this approach.

It relies on comprehensive data transfer while safeguarding the interests of those personally affected.

On this basis, it is possible to work, research and do business with personal data in the internal market.

Contrary to what some public discourses would have us believe, personal data is not a “res extra commercium” that would be withdrawn from private-use management.

Very few types of data processing are so risky that they have to be taboo and the transfer and use of this sensitive data cannot be justified even by using encryption and pseudonymization technology.

Contrary to what some public discourses would have us believe, personal data is not a “res extra commercium” that would be withdrawn from private-use management.

Very few types of data processing are so risky that they have to be taboo and the transfer and use of this sensitive data cannot be justified even by using encryption and pseudonymization technology.

Contrary to what some public discourses would have us believe, personal data is not a “res extra commercium” that would be withdrawn from private-use management.

Very few types of data processing are so risky that they have to be taboo and the transfer and use of this sensitive data cannot be justified even by using encryption and pseudonymization technology.

2. Courage for freedom among those responsible

Since 2018 – the year the GDPR came into effect – we have witnessed a highly defensive debate about the use of personal information, as if Europe had abandoned the future-oriented and in many ways profitable processing of personal data.

Conversely, a frustrated data economy throws the baby out with the bathwater if it accuses the grown and vital data protection of being hostile to the economy or of the past.

Rather, those responsible in government and business must have the courage and foresight to understand and respect the role of data protection, but also not to exaggerate it.

This includes recognizing and self-confidently accepting their responsibility in the interpretation of data protection law.

In doing so, one may also raise objections to the overly narrow application practice of supervisory authorities and should not shy away from conflict with potential plaintiffs for damages due to alleged data protection violations.

Throughout Europe, those responsible can rely on the control mechanisms of the rule of law, in particular the courts, which are becoming more and more knowledgeable.

Courage instead of frustration is the motto.