SCENARIO
Please use the following to answer the next question:
Joe is the new privacy manager for Who-R-U, a Canadian business that provides DNA analysis. The company is headquartered in Montreal, and all of its employees are located there. The company offers its services to Canadians only: Its website is in English and French, it accepts only Canadian currency, and it blocks internet traffic from outside of Canada (although this solution doesn't prevent all non-Canadian traffic). It also declines to process orders that request the DNA report to be sent outside of Canada, and returns orders that show a non-Canadian return address.
Bob, the President of Who-R-U, thinks there is a lot of interest for the product in the EU, and the company is exploring a number of plans to expand its customer base.
The first plan, collegially called We-Track-U, will use an app to collect information about its current Canadian customer base. The expansion will allow its Canadian customers to use the app while traveling abroad. He suggests that the company use this app to gather location information. If the plan shows promise, Bob proposes to use push notifications and text messages to encourage existing customers to pre-register for an EU version of the service. Bob calls this work plan, We-Text-U. Once the company has gathered enough pre- registrations, it will develop EU-specific content and services.
Another plan is called Customer for Life. The idea is to offer additional services through the company's app, like storage and sharing of DNA information with other applications and medical providers. The company's contract says that it can keep customer DNA indefinitely, and use it to offer new services and market them to customers. It also says that customers agree not to withdraw direct marketing consent. Paul, the marketing director, suggests that the company should fully exploit these provisions, and that it can work around customers' attempts to withdraw consent because the contract invalidates them.
The final plan is to develop a brand presence in the EU. The company has already begun this process. It is in the process of purchasing the naming rights for a building in Germany, which would come with a few offices that Who-R-U executives can use while traveling internationally. The office doesn't include any technology or infrastructure; rather, it's simply a room with a desk and some chairs.
On a recent trip concerning the naming-rights deal, Bob's laptop is stolen. The laptop held unencrypted DNA reports on 5,000 Who-R-U customers, all of whom are residents of Canad a. The reports include customer name, birthdate, ethnicity, racial background, names of relatives, gender, and occasionally health information.
If Who-R-U decides to track locations using its app, what must it do to comply with the GDPR?

Which aspect of the GDPR will likely have the most impact on the consistent implementation of data protection laws throughout the European Union?

Which judicial body makes decisions on actions taken by individuals wishing to enforce their rights under EU law?

SCENARIO
Please use the following to answer the next question:
TripBliss Inc. is a travel service company which has lost substantial revenue over the last few years. Their new manager, Oliver, suspects that this is partly due to the company's outdated website. After doing some research, he meets with a sales representative from the up-and-coming IT company Techiva, hoping that they can design a new, cutting-edge website for TripBliss Inc.'s foundering business.
During negotiations, a Techiva representative describes a plan for gathering more customer information through detailed questionnaires, which could be used to tailor their preferences to specific travel destinations.
TripBliss Inc. can choose any number of data categories - age, income, ethnicity - that would help them best accomplish their goals. Oliver loves this idea, but would also like to have some way of gauging how successful this approach is, especially since the questionnaires will require customers to provide explicit consent to having their data collected. The Techiva representative suggests that they also run a program to analyze the new website's traffic, in order to get a better understanding of how customers are using it. He explains his plan to place a number of cookies on customer devices. The cookies will allow the company to collect IP addresses and other information, such as the sites from which the customers came, how much time they spend on the TripBliss Inc. website, and which pages on the site they visit. All of this information will be compiled in log files, which Techiva will analyze by means of a special program. TripBliss Inc. would receive aggregate statistics to help them evaluate the website's effectiveness. Oliver enthusiastically engages Techiva for these services.
Techiva assigns the analytics portion of the project to longtime account manager Leon Santos. As is standard practice, Leon is given administrator rights to TripBliss Inc.'s website, and can authorize access to the log files gathered from it. Unfortunately for TripBliss Inc., however, Leon is taking on this new project at a time when his dissatisfaction with Techiva is at a high point. In order to take revenge for what he feels has been unfair treatment at the hands of the company, Leon asks his friend Fred, a hobby hacker, for help. Together they come up with the following plan: Fred will hack into Techiva's system and copy their log files onto a USB stick.
Despite his initial intention to send the USB to the press and to the data protection authority in order to denounce Techiva, Leon experiences a crisis of conscience and ends up reconsidering his plan. He decides instead to securely wipe all the data from the USB stick and inform his manager that the company's system of access control must be reconsidered.
If TripBliss Inc. decides not to report the incident to the supervisory authority, what would be their BEST defense?

Which of the following countries will continue to enjoy adequacy status under the GDPR, pending any future European Commission decision to the contrary?