Gosh! Hooda thunked?
Course it's inadequate: That's the fucking point. Just as "inadequacy" (to put it politely) was always the point of "Safe (sic) Harbor (sic)." Doesn't the EU's "data protection supervisor" understand what a sham is?
The ONLY real solution (and it would be a simple solution, easy to regulate and police*) is (still!) to require effective client-side encryption.. which will, of course, NEVER happen: How would the "five eyes" easily subvert that?
Another worthless morass of crappy faux-altruistic legalese bullshit we'll get then.
*anyone else remember when that word used to mean ensuring laws were being followed - rather than just the implicit prefix to the word "state"?