EU Data Pro­tec­tion for Copi­lot Web Search and Teams Meetings

Using gene­ra­ti­ve AI in Micro­soft 365 is not a risk, it is a mat­ter of con­sis­tent GDPR com­pli­ance and pro­per imple­men­ta­ti­on of EU data pro­tec­tion requirements.

Copi­lot Web Search allows exter­nal web infor­ma­ti­on to be inte­gra­ted con­tex­tual­ly into Copi­lot chats. In Micro­soft Teams, fea­tures such as tran­scrip­ti­on, live trans­la­ti­on, and mee­ting recor­ding enable effi­ci­ent, inter­na­tio­nal, and acces­si­ble mee­tings as well as impro­ved docu­men­ta­ti­on. At the same time, the AI capa­bi­li­ties within Micro­soft 365 pro­cess per­so­nal data, which requi­res an assess­ment under the EU Gene­ral Data Pro­tec­tion Regu­la­ti­on (GDPR). Con­tra­ry to some claims, the use of the­se fea­tures can be GDPR-compliant. As with the deploy­ment of Micro­soft 365 and Micro­soft Copi­lot more gene­ral­ly, com­pli­ance depends on a struc­tu­red legal assess­ment and the pro­per imple­men­ta­ti­on of appli­ca­ble data pro­tec­tion requirements.

Copi­lot Web Search: Per­mis­si­ble with a Legi­ti­ma­te Inte­rest Assessment

The use of Copi­lot Web Search is optio­nal. When enab­led, Copi­lot can access infor­ma­ti­on from the Inter­net to pro­vi­de more accu­ra­te respon­ses.  Copi­lot eva­lua­tes the user’s prompt and deter­mi­nes whe­ther exter­nal web infor­ma­ti­on may be hel­pful. It then gene­ra­tes a shor­ten­ed search query and sends it to the Bing search ser­vice. From a data pro­tec­tion per­spec­ti­ve, this pro­cess is rele­vant only if the shor­ten­ed search query excep­tio­nal­ly con­ta­ins per­so­nal data. The Bing search ser­vice is ope­ra­ted by Micro­soft under its own inde­pen­dent con­trol­ler responsibility.

In most cases, the legal basis for trans­fer­ring data to Micro­soft is the legi­ti­ma­te inte­rest of the con­trol­ler (Art. 6(1)(f) GDPR). This requi­res a docu­men­ted balan­cing test bet­ween the controller’s inte­rests and the rights and free­doms of the data sub­jects con­cer­ned. Due to the limi­t­ed scope of data trans­mit­ted and clear pur­po­se limi­ta­ti­on, the resul­ting risk for data sub­jects will often be con­side­red low.

Typi­cal legi­ti­ma­te inte­rests sup­port­ing the use of Copi­lot Web Search include:

  • Impro­ving effi­ci­en­cy in rese­arch and decision-making processes
  • Enhan­cing the qua­li­ty and accu­ra­cy of information
  • Redu­cing risks asso­cia­ted with uncon­trol­led use of “shadow AI” tools.

Becau­se Bing is a glo­bal ser­vice, the EU Data Boun­da­ry does not app­ly to search queries. As a result, trans­fers of per­so­nal data to third count­ries, inclu­ding the United Sta­tes, can­not be enti­re­ly excluded. Such trans­fers are curr­ent­ly based on the EU-US Data Pri­va­cy Frame­work. Alter­na­tively, orga­niza­ti­ons may rely on Stan­dard Con­trac­tu­al Clau­ses (SCCs) as an appro­pria­te safe­guard for inter­na­tio­nal data transfers.

Micro­soft Teams: Lawful Use of Tran­scrip­ti­on, Trans­la­ti­on, and Recording

Tran­scrip­ti­ons, live trans­la­ti­ons, and recor­dings in Micro­soft Teams typi­cal­ly invol­ve the pro­ces­sing of per­so­nal data. In employ­ment con­texts, rely­ing on con­sent is often not con­side­red a robust legal basis due to the imba­lan­ce bet­ween employ­er and employee. The­r­e­fo­re, orga­niza­ti­ons typi­cal­ly rely on legi­ti­ma­te inte­rests (Art. 6(1)(f) GDPR).

To rely on this legal basis, three con­di­ti­ons must be met:

  1. The exis­tence of a legi­ti­ma­te inte­rest of the con­trol­ler or a third par­ty (e.g., ensu­ring tracea­bi­li­ty of decision-making processes)
  2. The neces­si­ty of the pro­ces­sing to pur­sue that inte­rest (for exam­p­le, asses­sing whe­ther manu­al note-taking would con­sti­tu­te a less intru­si­ve alternative)
  3. A balan­cing test with the inte­rests, fun­da­men­tal rights, and free­doms of the data sub­jects invol­ved (e.g., whe­re par­ti­cu­lar­ly sen­si­ti­ve dis­cus­sion topics are involved)

Artic­le 9 GDPR, which regu­la­tes the pro­ces­sing of spe­cial cate­go­ries of per­so­nal data, will gene­ral­ly not app­ly in this con­text. Micro­soft Teams does not pro­cess par­ti­ci­pan­ts’ voices for bio­me­tric iden­ti­fi­ca­ti­on but sole­ly for con­tent pro­ces­sing, such as tran­scrip­ti­on or translation.

Orga­niza­ti­ons must nevert­hel­ess com­ply with trans­pa­ren­cy obli­ga­ti­ons under Art. 13 GDPR and ensu­re that data sub­ject rights, inclu­ding the right of access and the right to object, can be exer­cis­ed effec­tively. They must also imple­ment appro­pria­te data reten­ti­on and dele­ti­on poli­ci­es to ensu­re GDPR-compliant data life­cy­cle manage­ment. In addi­ti­on to data pro­tec­tion law, orga­niza­ti­ons must also con­sider appli­ca­ble natio­nal cri­mi­nal laws. For exam­p­le, under Sec­tion 201 of the Ger­man Cri­mi­nal Code (StGB), recor­ding non-public speech wit­hout aut­ho­riza­ti­on may con­sti­tu­te a cri­mi­nal offen­se. Com­pa­nies should the­r­e­fo­re careful­ly assess the legal basis for recor­ding meetings.

Con­clu­si­on

The use of AI fea­tures in Micro­soft 365 is pri­ma­ri­ly a mat­ter of gover­nan­ce. Orga­niza­ti­ons that cle­ar­ly defi­ne the appli­ca­ble legal bases, docu­ment legi­ti­ma­te inte­rest assess­ments, ensu­re trans­pa­ren­cy, and imple­ment the neces­sa­ry tech­ni­cal and orga­niza­tio­nal mea­su­res can rea­li­ze effi­ci­en­cy gains while effec­tively mana­ging data pro­tec­tion risks.

More detail­ed infor­ma­ti­on on data pro­tec­tion and digi­tal sove­reig­n­ty in Micro­soft 365 can be found in Kom­mu­ni­ka­ti­on & Recht, issue 12/2025, p. 755 ff. (available here as a free full-text publi­ca­ti­on in German).

back

Stay up-to-date

We use your email address exclusively for sending our newsletter. You have the right to revoke your consent at any time with effect for the future. For further information, please refer to our privacy policy.