124 annual report 2011 15-1. Authorities allowed to use information from open Facebook profiles The Central Customs and Tax Administration (SKAT) used an employee’s private Facebook profile to obtain information about a woman from her Facebook. The woman had an open profile, which meant that any Facebook user would be able to see the information about her on Facebook. The woman felt that her privacy had been invaded and she complained to the Data Protection Agency, which forwarded her complaint to the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman stated that the standard terms drawn up by Facebook for the use of Facebook are contractual terms governing the private law relationship between Facebook and its users. The standard terms have no legal effect in relation to administrative authorities in Denmark, which are subject to public law regulations and principles. In the matter at hand, SKAT was subject to the inquisitorial principle and the provisions of the Act on Processing of Personal Data. The Ombudsman also stated that if a person has a Facebook profile which is so open that any Facebook user will be able to see the information on the person contained therein, such information is in reality publicly available. According to circumstances, this can also be the case if a person has a restricted-access Facebook profile but has a very large number of Facebook ‘friends’. Information about the person can become publicly available in this instance as well. In principle, the authorities may freely process publicly available personal data pursuant to section 7(2)(iii) of the Act on Processing of Personal Data. How­ ever, the free processing is limited by the Act’s section 5 on good data processing practice. The authorities may only process personal data for legitimate purposes and if the data are relevant to the case. The Ombudsman could not criticise that SKAT had obtained information ­using an employee’s private Facebook profile, because the employee did not use a false profile and, given the way the woman had set up her Facebook profile, did not need to make himself known to the woman in order to get the information. (Case No. 2011-2657-2091)