SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The CJEU (Court of Justice of the European Union) issued its judgment on the Schrems II case, formally called Data Protection Commissioner v Facebook Ireland Limited, Maximillian Schrems (Case C-311/1). The gist is that US companies are now put back to an average status, same as most others, with no special access to EU data due to operating in the US. It will take a while before the decision is published at the government site. Max himself has also issued his first statement on the CJEU judgment, notably that the European Commission bowed to US pressure and that now reform of US surveillance is unavoidable:
US Surveillance reform is unavoidable - CJEU just says it out loud
The Court was clear that the far-reaching US surveillance laws are in conflict with EU fundamental rights. The US limits most protections to "US persons", but does not protect the data of foreign customers of US companies from the NSA. As there is no way of finding out if you or your business are under surveillance, people also have no option to go to the courts. The CJEU found that this violates the 'essence' of certain EU fundamental rights.
Schrems: "The Court clarified for a second time now that there is a clash between EU privacy law and US surveillance law. As the EU will not change its fundamental rights to please the NSA, the only way to overcome this clash is for the US to introduce solid privacy rights for all people – including foreigners. Surveillance reform thereby becomes crucial for the business interests of Silicon Valley."
He covers several other points in his statement, including that the European Commission clearly bowed to US pressure in its violation, that EU Data Protection Agencies are obligated to act and now have no excuses, the loopholes currently used by surveillance engines like Facebook have been closed, and that these cases are expensive and can only be won through concerted effort and investment.
The roots of the case go back to the Snowden revelations in 2013 after which Max Schrems filed a complaint with Ireland's DPC (Data Protection Commission) regarding the so-called Safe Harbor agreements, leading to their invalidation in 2015 and subsequent replacement by the EU-US Privacy Shield in 2016. It was back in 2017 that the Irish High Court kicked the case up to the CJEU.
Previously:
(2020) Top Euro Court Advised: Citing 'National Security' Doesn't Justify Widespread Surveillance
(2019) EU's Top Court Says Tracking Cookies Require Actual Consent Before Scarfing Down User Data
(2018) Privacy Expert Schrems Files GDPR Complaints Against Google, Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp
(2018) Facebook is Trying to Block Schrems II Privacy Referral to EU Top Court
(2018) High Court Sets Out 11 Questions for ECJ on EU-US Data Transfers
(2015) EU Top Court Rules Safe Harbour Treaty Invalid
(Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Monday July 20 2020, @12:27PM (5 children)
Error detection module defective
Facebook [wikipedia.org]
Google offices in Europe [about.google]
Amazon offices in Europe [aboutamazon.eu]
Ebay has 11 offices across the Europe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday July 20 2020, @12:36PM (4 children)
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday July 20 2020, @12:37PM (3 children)
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday July 20 2020, @12:54PM (2 children)
6 years so long ago, especially after pissing off Merkel [theguardian.com].
If you take 2 minutes of your time to RTFA, you'll get the present legislation was actually triggered by NSA being naughty.
Illegal is illegal.
Maybe not. One doesn't need to reach Nirvana to do better than yesterday and who knows what tomorrow will bring on? Maybe NSA will realize their mistakes, maybe the US govt will get it and stop mass surveillance on EU subjects, maybe even mass surveillance on Americans. One can hope.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday July 20 2020, @01:37PM (1 child)
Except, of course, when it's not illegal. I hope I'm not going too fast here? I was hoping my earlier phrase "legal protections for such surveillance" would inform you that real world scenarios exist where these things are not illegal in the regions where they are being performed and hence, can be done in such a way that the EU can't punish anyone for it. No punishment == not illegal in my book.
This reminds me of the Mueller indictments of Russian parties that will never see the light of day simply because the indicted parties aren't dumb enough to visit the US.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday July 20 2020, @01:43PM
Fast? No.
Irrelevant? Yes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford