![]() ![]() It is the 21st century equivalent of outsourcing. Many use US-based cloud services to store or process data that they could not do themselves. The companies most affected are likely to be smaller, less financially and technologically able companies. But it may open the door to further probes, complaints and lawsuits from users and data regulators. Sites and services such as Facebook are highly unlikely to be disrupted to any meaningful level. ![]() It may also help stop the US government from being able to gain access to user data from the EU. The dissolution of the agreement will, in theory, ensure better data protection for users’ personal information going forward. The impact on users in the short term is unlikely to be obvious. transfer of the data of Facebook’s European subscribers to the US should be suspended on the grounds that that country does not afford an adequate level of protection of personal data,” the EUCJ said. What about Facebook?įor Facebook, which has been placed at the centre of this case by Schrems, the decision means that the Irish data protection authority (DPA) will be forced to investigate the Austrian’s claims and Facebook’s data protection practices. The search company, for instance, lists four data centres within Europe, including one in Ireland. Many US companies have established or are in the process of building EU-based data centres to handle data for EU citizens, including Facebook, Apple and Google. Others may be forced to stop the transfer of data to the US until they have. Many will already have model contract clauses already drawn up. The impact on large US technology companies and their operations within the EU is likely to be limited to a large amount of paperwork. wish to continue sending Europeans’ personal data over the Atlantic they will just have to guarantee an adequate level of protection in line with EU rules.” Monique Goyens, director general of the European Consumer Organisation said: “In essence, if Facebook, Google et al. These agreements authorise the transfer of data outside of Europe. Now that the 2000 agreement has been called invalid, American companies – including Google, Facebook, Apple and Microsoft – can no longer rely on self-certification and must seek to strike “model contract clauses” in each case. Patrick Van Eecke, co-head of the global privacy practice DLA Piper said: “The advantage of safe harbour was that it functioned as a kind of ‘one stop shop’ allowing for the export of personal data to the US, whoever in Europe it came from, without the need to ask for consent, or to enter into bilateral agreements, over and over again.” Can data still be transferred to the US? ![]() It allowed companies such as Facebook to self-certify that they would protect EU citizens’ data when transferred and stored within US data centres. The safe harbour agreement that was made between the EC and the US government essentially promised to protect EU citizens’ data if transferred by American companies to the US. EU privacy law forbids the movement of its citizens’ data outside of the EU, unless it is transferred to a location which is deemed to have “adequate” privacy protections in line with those of the EU. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |