back to article Privacy Shield under pressure as lawyers back MEPs' call for suspension

The US is under increasing pressure over Privacy Shield as an EU lawyers' association backed MEPs’ calls for a suspension of the deal. Privacy Shield – which governs trans-Atlantic data flows, making it essential for the day-to-day workings of large numbers of companies – was hurriedly drawn up in summer 2016 after its …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Art of Modern Warfare Chapter 1

    Rule No 1. You do not keep your citizens and your businesses private and commercially sensitive data on enemy territory.

    Thanks to the Orange Baboon interview from yesterday we are now clear where we stand. We are the greatest foe of the United States. There is nothing more to be said here. There is no point to have any discussions on anything except basic trade of goods (and even that needs careful national security considerations).

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Art of Modern Warfare Chapter 1

      And then it turns out all your key businesses are multinational and send key data around regardless of your security desires, particularly when the businesses biggest market is also your "greatest foe".

      Safe Harbour and Privacy Shield both appeared to be politicians saying one thing while reality was significantly different and as long as everyone kept up the charade, everyone was happy. If you ever stared too hard, the illusions you tried to maintain disappeared as the desires of the different parties involved differed significantly.

      Feel free to blame any of the politicians you wish to over the last 20 years for this charade.

      Personally, I blame the EU for not wanting to continue the charade (Safe Harbour) while not having a workable solution to replace it.

      1. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

        Re: Art of Modern Warfare Chapter 1

        Personally, I blame the EU for not wanting to continue the charade

        Personally, I blame the US for their utter contempt of privacy and the security of other people's data..

      2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Art of Modern Warfare Chapter 1

        "Personally, I blame the EU for not wanting to continue the charade (Safe Harbour) while not having a workable solution to replace it."

        A workable solution to replace it does not exist short of a complete reform of the US's attitude to other people's data. I blame the EU for even believing such nonsense even deserved to be considered.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Art of Modern Warfare Chapter 1

          "A workable solution to replace it does not exist short of a complete reform of the US's attitude to other people's data. I blame the EU for even believing such nonsense even deserved to be considered."

          No.

          A workable system doesn't involve the EU changing the US's laws (at least without agreement from all parties, and even then you are still left with political will remaining in place, which is arguably the real issue as the US's position in 1998 wasn't as strong (due to less personal data flowing through the Internet) and their list of enemies differed from today (country-based rather than individuals in friendly countries).

          Realistically, a workable system relies on the EU building there own systems to their own laws and not being so heavily dependent on US systems (cloud/Windows/Android/iOS etc) or the EU being able to stop their citizens using said US systems. Which also explains why its so hard to do in practice.

          Or you can take the Safe Harbour approach of pretending all sides are playing nicely and every time one party (*cough* the US *cough*) breaks the agreement, create a new agreement called "Safe Harbour n+1..."

  2. Duncan Macdonald Silver badge

    Fat chance

    The USA will not give up its spying on its "friends" - commercial intelligence data passed to favored people allows them to make huge amounts of money from insider trading and to hurt the competitors of US companies (eg Airbus).

    Any firm that uses the cloud ought to ask itself - is there any data that they do not want passed to their US competitors - if so then DO NOT USE THE CLOUD.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Fat chance

      Most of Europe except the UK and Poland are no longer friends of the US, they're foes. US companies should therefore be frozen out by binning Privacy Shield. In fact, the EU countries really need to be taking a hard look at using any US tech both software and hardware, but the problem is that there are very few EU options for hardware, and we can't trust the Chinese options either.

      1. JohnFen Silver badge

        Re: Fat chance

        As a US citizen, it pains me to have to agree with this analysis.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Fat chance

        while I would subscribe to the populist view (f... the Yanks!, etc, etc.) this is entirely irrational. Wars hurt everybody, but in the end, it's going to hurt EU more than it's going to hurt the US (never mind that little cluster of islands across the Channel, they're due to become the World Trading Superpower of 21st Century! :)

  3. Teiwaz Silver badge

    Trump to fix toxic U.S. political air

    I think we can be certain now, that those were wasted votes.

    If anything, he'll increase the toxic miasma well beyond U.S. borders

    1. Lars Silver badge
      Flame

      Re: Trump to fix toxic U.S. political air

      I would be silly and sad to think Trump represents the USA.

      1. JohnFen Silver badge

        Re: Trump to fix toxic U.S. political air

        What's really sad is that Trump technically does represent the US. Doing so is one of the core parts of being President.

        What Turmp doesn't represent is the interests, beliefs, ethics, or sensibilities of US citizenry (or the nation itself).

        1. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

          Re: Trump to fix toxic U.S. political air

          What Turmp doesn't represent is the interests, beliefs, ethics, or sensibilities of US citizenry

          Actually, he does (unfortunately) represent the views, beliefs and ethics of a substantial portion of the US population.

          Unfortunately, it's the authoritarian, anti-science, racist and fascist portion.

          1. JohnFen Silver badge

            Re: Trump to fix toxic U.S. political air

            "Actually, he does (unfortunately) represent the views, beliefs and ethics of a substantial portion of the US population."

            He represents the views of a minority of the US population, but substantial? Depends on how you define "substantial". As near as I can see, it's less than 20% of the population.

  4. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    "there were a number of misgivings from data protection watchdogs and observers"

    And outright disbelief from the rest of us. Since then the CLOUD Act has simply made things worse from the US side and GDPR must surely have broken the so-called standard clauses.

  5. This post has been deleted by its author

  6. Marketing Hack Silver badge
    Meh

    Recipe for fudge....

    Let's swap some recipes, because you know a fudge to paper things over (again) is coming on this issue. EU companies with significant U.S. business will scream if Privacy Shield is nuked from orbit, and European sigint agencies that enjoy the largesse of the NSA will be right behind them.

    1. Rogerborg 2.0
      Big Brother

      Re: Recipe for fudge....

      Well, spying on each others' citizens and sharing that information around is the global way.

      You're not one of those filthy Nazionalists, are you?

  7. Joe Harrison Silver badge

    Unreasonable

    It's unreasonable to suggest that this or that country is or is not the friend of another one.

    "We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow" - Henry Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston

    Also Privacy Shield looks just as useless as its predecessor Safe Harbor, both relying as they do on self-certification by the US company concerned.

  8. Claptrap314 Bronze badge

    A multinational is a multinational.

    I'm going to keep hammering this. If a company does business in region X, then it is going to have to abide by the laws of region X. If the laws of region X and region Y are incompatible, it is going to have to choose which region it wants to do business with.

    The EU & the US have significantly different views of things like the source of rights. These differences are reflected in their laws. It does not matter how hard the multinationals lobby, or even how many politicians they buy off, these differences are deep.

    For all their flaws, however, the multinationals really do provide goods and services more cheaply than smaller counterparts would. That is how they exist. Breaking up their operations will have real costs.

    So, it is convenient for people to lie and say that a company can comply both with EU & US laws.

    Don't watch sausage, or law, being made.

    1. JohnFen Silver badge

      Re: A multinational is a multinational.

      "For all their flaws, however, the multinationals really do provide goods and services more cheaply than smaller counterparts would"

      I actually consider that to be one of their flaws as well, as they do that by externalizing costs onto the societies in which they operate.

      1. Claptrap314 Bronze badge

        Re: A multinational is a multinational.

        Economics of scale & especially network effects are a real thing. Certainly, almost any company will engage in monopoly abuse when it gets the chance.

        Same thing if the company is of class Government, by the way. I am particularly nervous on that point.

    2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: A multinational is a multinational.

      "If the laws of region X and region Y are incompatible, it is going to have to choose which region it wants to do business with."

      There are alternatives such as a franchise arrangements which would enable business to be conducted in both regions according to the local laws with the former multinational profiting from royalties. This assumes, of course, that the business is even legal in one of these regions. Selling other people's data presents a problem in this respect.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Toothless Tiger

    The recent fines imposed on Facebook removed any doubt of this sad fact when the maximum allowable fine was easily paid with change that fell between the seat cushions of Zuck's sofa.

    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/07/11/ico_fine_facebook_cambridge_analytica/

    1. John Crisp

      Re: Toothless Tiger

      That was then.

      This is now.

      GDPR..

      'Nuff said.

    2. Mike 137

      Re: Toothless Tiger

      The Facebook fine was imposed under DPA 1998 due to the timing of the action, and £500k was then the maximum possible. Under GDPR/UK DPA 2018 we now have up to 4% of gross annual turnover as maximum. That might make a difference in any subsequent action.

    3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Toothless Tiger

      Yet another numpty of poor reading comprehension.

  10. Someone Else Silver badge
    FAIL

    Great!

    The group of nine will meet representatives from the US Departments of State, Justice, Homeland Security and Commerce, as well as the Federal Trade Commission, politicians from the US Congress and Senate, along with industry and NGOs.

    Great...just great! Brainless wankers, the bunch of them (with the possible exception of the NGOs -- depending on who they actually are). Most of these folks have been banging about for years now looking for the sooper sekrit encryption back door that only they can use...to defeat the terrierists, of course.

    Color me unimpressed that this meeting will come up with anything other than noise (and perhaps, a peculiarly bovine stench).

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    America Duck Yeah

    Its a very different world from last year in data-protection terms. It won't be so easy for backroom deals to excuse away these transfers now. Lets face it... The US doesn't like being told what it can't do. So they won't comply. And where there is doubt, there is no doubt: No Transfers.....

    https://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/1/2018/06/12/meps_privacy_shield_insufficient_protection/

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Whatever they promise

    If an American court can demand records simply because the company is based in the US then it's a waste of time.

  13. Mike 137

    Sources?

    Is a TWEET really the sole evidence of this?

    How about providing a link to an authoritative source for something with such far-reaching implications?

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Sources?

      "How about providing a link to an authoritative source for something with such far-reaching implications?"

      Isn't tweeting the official means of US govt. communication these days?

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    mission impossible for the EU

    how not to piss off the US and, at the same time make voters believe they come FIRST...

  15. EnviableOne Bronze badge

    Whats next ..

    Safe Harbour

    Privacy shield

    Pan Atlantic Privacy Plaster?

    1. SImon Hobson Silver badge

      Re: Whats next ..

      How about :

      Safe Harbour Iteration Two (S.H.I.T.)

      Enabling Real Sharing Extravaganza (A.R.S.E.)

      Policy Enabling Notional International Sharing (P.E.N.I.S.)

      Protocol Undoing Privacy Safeguards (P.U.P.S.)

      Darn, I'm not very good at these am I ?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019