This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/apr/14/data-regulators-reject-eu-us-privacy-shield-safe-harbour-deal
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 1 | Version 2 |
|---|---|
| Data regulators reject EU-US Privacy Shield safe harbour deal | Data regulators reject EU-US Privacy Shield safe harbour deal |
| (5 months later) | |
| The pan-European data regulator group, Article 29, has criticised the Privacy Shield safe harbour revamp proposed by the European commission over its lack of surveillance protection from the US government for EU citizens’ data. | The pan-European data regulator group, Article 29, has criticised the Privacy Shield safe harbour revamp proposed by the European commission over its lack of surveillance protection from the US government for EU citizens’ data. |
| The EU-US Privacy Shield was agreed in February after two years of cross-Atlantic negotiations. The agreement should allow companies to transfer EU citizens’ data for processing or storage within the US, replacing the 2000 that was invalidated by the European court of justice after it ruled the agreement did not have “adequate” privacy protections inline with those of the EU. | The EU-US Privacy Shield was agreed in February after two years of cross-Atlantic negotiations. The agreement should allow companies to transfer EU citizens’ data for processing or storage within the US, replacing the 2000 that was invalidated by the European court of justice after it ruled the agreement did not have “adequate” privacy protections inline with those of the EU. |
| Isabelle Falque-Pierrotin, chair of the group of Article 29 working party, said an area of concern was “the possibility that is left in the Shield ... for bulk collection which, if massive and indiscriminate, is not acceptable”. | Isabelle Falque-Pierrotin, chair of the group of Article 29 working party, said an area of concern was “the possibility that is left in the Shield ... for bulk collection which, if massive and indiscriminate, is not acceptable”. |
| The Privacy Shield has limits in place as to what the US government can and can’t do with the data, including surveillance as revealed by the Snowden leaks for six purposes such as counterterrorism and cybersecurity. | The Privacy Shield has limits in place as to what the US government can and can’t do with the data, including surveillance as revealed by the Snowden leaks for six purposes such as counterterrorism and cybersecurity. |
| Paul Breitbarth, representing the working party, said: “We think [the limits] are still very broadly defined and can’t count as targeted data collection, so for us it’s still indiscriminate and mass data collection.” | Paul Breitbarth, representing the working party, said: “We think [the limits] are still very broadly defined and can’t count as targeted data collection, so for us it’s still indiscriminate and mass data collection.” |
| Article 29 is also concerned about the strength and independence of the US ombudsman, which will deal with European complaints. | Article 29 is also concerned about the strength and independence of the US ombudsman, which will deal with European complaints. |
| The working party’s opinion is not law, but it forms the basis from which national data regulators within each member state set out their laws and practices. | The working party’s opinion is not law, but it forms the basis from which national data regulators within each member state set out their laws and practices. |
| Should modifications to the Privacy Shield promised by the EC before its adoption in June not allay their fears, the agreement could be rapidly challenged in the courts. | Should modifications to the Privacy Shield promised by the EC before its adoption in June not allay their fears, the agreement could be rapidly challenged in the courts. |
| Deema Freij, global privacy officer at Intralinks said: “If the EC and the US bodies do not take the opinion of the Article 29 working party seriously, Privacy Shield is more likely to be challenged in the higher European courts in the near future, especially if the Max Schrems case is anything to go by. Then we’re back to square one.” | Deema Freij, global privacy officer at Intralinks said: “If the EC and the US bodies do not take the opinion of the Article 29 working party seriously, Privacy Shield is more likely to be challenged in the higher European courts in the near future, especially if the Max Schrems case is anything to go by. Then we’re back to square one.” |