EU Parliament Supports Suspending US Data Sharing

New submitter egladil writes "As seen previously here on Slashdot, the European Parliament was to vote on 'whether existing data sharing agreements between the two continents should be suspended, following allegations that U.S. intelligence spied on E.U. citizens.' With the votes now having been cast, the result is 483 in favor of the resolution and 98 against, while 65 abstained. The resolution in question in part called for the U.S. 'to suspend and review any laws and surveillance programs that "violate the fundamental right of E.U. citizens to privacy and data protection," as well as Europe's "sovereignty and jurisdiction."' It also decided that the E.U. should investigate the surveillance of E.U. citizens, and finally gave backing to the European Commision in case they should decide to suspend the data sharing deals currently in place with the U.S., such as the Passenger Name Record and Terrorist Finance Tracking Program agreements. The question now is whether the E.U. commision will go through with suspending these deals or not."

Comments

... More effort than ... ?

[DavidClarkeHR]

Well, it doesn't seem like much, but it's more than the american people have done in response.

Or maybe it's not MORE, but it's certainly more visible.

Re:... More effort than ... ?

[Jade_Wayfarer]

Right, even if that doesn't look truly sincere and likely will have no long-lasting consequences for anybody it is still something. Maybe it's one of the positive sides of having this many parties in EU - if "bigger fish" would try to ignore this issue, smaller parties will get more support on the next elections, so everybody has to do something (or, at least, pretend to do something good enough). Pirate Party is surely going to rally their supporters over this issue.

Re:... More effort than ... ?

[erroneus]

This wasn't "the EU people" it was their legislative body. The US legislative bodies are complicit with what has been going on. While one side feigns outrage at the other party's activities, it can be demonstrated that both parties participated willingly in what's been going on. When Republicans ruled, the Democrats pretended to be outraged and even to "do away" with the constitutionlly illegal activites. But once in charge, the Democrats didn't do away with the illegal activities (and I just say CRIMES for brevity?) and then intensified them.

So to say the "EU people" did more than the "US people" is a bit misleading. But to say that the EU government is more responsive to the need to support their own laws would be extremely accurate to point out and a well deserved shaming.

Re:... More effort than ... ?

[Anonymous Coward]

if moving money for criminals was actually hard then I doubt usa would be having such a mexican gang problem...

the question is - why can't we get american raw banking data? note that you could always request specific data and law enforcement co-operation. but in fundamental it's kinda stupid if the fbi has more access to banking data of poland than what german cops have, don't you think?

Re:... More effort than ... ?

[Nerdfest]

If the deals violated the fundamental rights of EU citizens, people should probably be asking how they were made in the first place as well. Something is obviously broken.

Re:... More effort than ... ?

[Wookact]

See you posted AC because you know people can supply just as much evidence that Faux does the same thing.

Re: ... More effort than ... ?

[Mabhatter]

You cannot file suit agains these because they are SECRET. A suit has to have DEFINATE act toons and personnel. Some lines on a PowerPoint won't cut it.

The NSA and CIA are not "police" and they were chartered outside the Constitution way back in the 50's and 60's when FREEDOM was at its peak! to prove damage, a citizen would have to have a CRIMINAL TRIAL EFFECTED by this illegally obtained information. You only have rights against the government USING illegally obtained information in courts. As these are SPIES, that's not going to happen.

You can fault the Patriot Act for mixing up spy works and anti-terrorist work, and regular police work. as well as mixing up the terminology used improperly by media and regular police to "sound like" they were "national security" agencies. These programs are owned by the NSA and not even subject to the petty FISA court playtime.

Re:... More effort than ... ?

[Curunir_wolf]

See you posted AC because you know people can supply just as much evidence that Faux does the same thing.

All the legacy media is compromised. All of it. The redeeming characteristic of Fox News is that the bias and propaganda is so obvious you don't even have to pay attention to see it going on. Many of the legacy media outlets are very good at appearing neutral while they lie and twist facts to fit their agenda. You have to research or have knowledge of the topic to see it, they are some very good media experts in the field and they make it all seem completely reasonable on the surface.

Re:... More effort than ... ?

[ideonexus]

It's a nice act, but isn't it a little on the hypocritical side considering France has just been exposed as having an equally egregious citizen-spying program in place? I'm glad the EU-legislation is doing something, but it sounds like they need to now pass a resolution condemning the program going on inside their own borders. Everyone should be outraged at PRISM, but everyone should also be outraged that France was condemning the United States for running a program they themselves were secretly running as well.

Re:... More effort than ... ?

[timeOday]

But "outrage" is something else - it is something that rises to the level of being a voting issue. Voters may not like the program, but they are not outraged, and our elected officials (especially the President) are not humiliated and discredited like they will be if there is a big terrorist attack like 9/11. So they are choosing the safest path... the "safest" from Benghazi-style retroactive finger-pointing, that is.

Anyways, I do find the reversal of values in the poll you linked to be fascinating, particularly that suddenly more Democrats than Republicans favor running somebody up the flag pole for leaking.

Re:... More effort than ... ?

[whitroth]

"Far left propaganda machines"?

What Americans know of the left is what Good Germans knew of Jews in the late thirties, you ignorant slut.

              mark

Re:... More effort than ... ?

[Cenan]

+1 for using the word slut in a sentence, we don't see enough of that here.
+1 for being factually correct, sorta.

Re:... More effort than ... ?

[jodido]

The EU parliament is no more interested in protecting the rights of EU residents than the US congress is. They're just being anti-American. If they were serious, they'd stop information sharing with France.

Re:... More effort than ... ?

[whitroth]

Yup. I'm in the US, but not an ignorant idiot. As a base, I use the definition of fascist of someone who speaks with more authority on the word than anyone here (or on Faux News): Mussolini, who liked to quote, "fascism is more properly called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power". (Can you say, "Dick Cheney and Halliburton, boys and girls?").

But we've got fools here who try to argue that the Nazis weren't right wing (they used the word sociaism in their name!!!), presumably to try to pretend that they've always been the good guys, and no one on their side has ever been bad. (Meanwhile, most of us on the left have no problem considering Stalin a homocidal psychopath.)

Oh, and "slut"? "You're an ignorant slut, Jane", Rosanne Rosanadana to Jane Curtin, old Saturday Night Live skits. Ooops, sorry, that's from before you were born....

                    mark

They should buy the data from U.S. instead

[Mondor]

Something tells me, that U.S. might have more information about E.U. citizens and stuff, than E.U. governments have.

Re:They should buy the data from U.S. instead

[Vanderhoth]

I think that's kind of part of the problem here. The U.S. is far more, and far too, aggressive in collecting data. The E.U., being a collection of countries that have historically spied on each other to very large extents and are now friendly, frowns on that sort of thing. So although I'm sure the E.U. is still doing spying on each other and just putting up this front to cover their tracks. The U.S. got caught because they were greedy for data and careless with it, now they have to pay the piper.

That'll be 50 cents please.

Re:They should buy the data from U.S. instead

[gl4ss]

Something tells me, that U.S. might have more information about E.U. citizens and stuff, than E.U. governments have.

Essentially that's the gist of the issue. The data sharing goes against the principles of data collection we have in EU, since Americans can't apparently be expected to keep the data out of extra eyes(because as statements by politicians go, they can do anything with it even without warrants or with secret warrants) it would be best to suspend such sharing.

it has potentially many economical impacts if USA has all the data and thinks it is just ok for them to use it for economical advantage and not limit to weeding out "terrorists"(and with the meaning of "terrorist" diluting every day...). basically - and in practice - usa has a map of all the contractual business ties within EU(and even worse is contracting analyzing data to pretty random best buddy outside firms too). add to that if the chinese are really waging a cyyyber war and NSA is so careless with their data then chinese probably have snapshots of the data too.

Re:They should buy the data from U.S. instead

[wvmarle]

Countries spying on each other is very different than what happened here. Countries were trying to uncover each other's trade and military secrets, to gauge one another's strengths and weaknesses - typically for use in international relations ranging from trade agreements to warfare. And I wouldn't be surprised if the various EU countries are still spying on one another big time.

Snooping on the private lives of ordinary citizens was rarely if ever part of the equation.

I don't have too much problems with the ordinary spying. It's basically what Snowden has done: he went after state secrets, in this case to expose them. In that sense he's a traditional-type spy. It keeps international relations in check: it allows countries to know more about the other, and in general I believe it can prevent many wars from taking place. Foreign embassies are of course hotbeds for spying activities, one of the reasons to have those embassies is to learn more about the host countries.

What the NSA has done is a major step further. They're nondiscriminatory collecting personal information about private citizens. About basically everyone. They don't target specific persons of interest, or even groups of interest. They just spy on everyone, and want to do this in absolute secrecy: no-one is allowed to know that such spying operations even exist.

As an ordinary citizen that has never even set foot in the USA, I am not of interest for any normal spy. I am not of interest to the local police. I live an ordinary life, or at least I try to, and am not at all happy with the idea that someone somewhere is trying to collect data about me. Trying to find out whether I might have any "terrorist tendencies" or whatever. The ultimate pre-crime situation.

And as an ordinary citizen I am of course totally powerless against some huge foreign entity. To use the Internet, I'm dependent on the USA's connections. There is no way around it. No legal protection (as they're outside my jurisdiction). Ordinary citizens don't even have the option to spy back like countries spy reciprocally - well most of us don't, Snowden managed to do just that.

Oh noes, a RESOLUTION!!!!

[TWiTfan]

I'm sure the NSA is quaking in its boots.

Re:Good

[Anonymous Coward]

The same resolution also addresses the betrayal by the Brits.

And they found out how? What of the messenger?

[ElBeano]

I'll believe it's more than theater when they provide a home for Snowden.

Any hope that rests with the European Commission

[Kjella]

is slim and none. It'd hardly be the first time the Parliament has voted for the right thing but the EC has said "well, we won't do that".

They authorized the European Commission?

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess that's the end of that. The European Commission has a track record of giving a flying shit about voters and the parliament. It is just interested in keeping the money flowing and won't do anything that would create a hiccup with that.

Without getting ordered by the parliament at least three times in a row, they won't touch any of the agreements in question.

why hypocrites

[anonieuweling]

Why was sharing all that data with the USA OK in the `war on terror`?
Why suddenly, when the EU leaders and G20 are spied upon, as it occurs, is this sharing suspended?
Why was it OK to violate privacy of EU citizens because of US demands?
Why doesn't it occur in full yet that the USA are a totalitarian state and that they want to put their views onto the rest of the world?
Why doesn't the EU show willingness to harbour Snowden, Assange and Manning as a gesture of humanitarian nature?
Why doesn't anyone understand that it won't help the USA at all if they incarcerate Manning, Assange and Snowden? The leaking will continue, just with more caution.

Re:why hypocrites

[amiga3D]

The problem is that the EU isn't as good at it.

Misunderstanding...

[BlueTak]

As I read previous comments, I, as a French, have a strange feeling of misunderstanding... What american people have to do with this ? Nothing. American government and intelligence agencies have all to do with it. We, europeans, know this perfectly. The american people is the first to be spied on. And so are the others.. Maybe, they could work this out together, couldn't they ?

Boeing and Airbus.

[Anonymous Coward]

US Gov gave military intelligence collected data to Boeing on the contract negotiations that Airbus were at that time winning.

Airbus were dropped.

Re:Boeing and Airbus.

[cold fjord]

Do you have a citation on that? I did a little looking, but found some unexpected things instead.

Exclusive: Airbus Dreamliner Dossier Revealed

In a stunning and candid critique of its chief competitor, Airbus has crafted a comprehensive competitive analysis that touches on nearly every aspect of the troubled 787 programme gleaned from Boeing proprietary data and an embedded network of sources from inside the Dreamliner's global supply chain.

Competitive intelligence is a standard practice in the aerospace industry, but the information revealed in the Airbus analysis reveals a scope and specificity of the data collected.

The document includes what appear to be seven slides labelled BOEING PROPRIETARY with a format style used in Boeing presentations, including two that appear to have been photocopied, raising questions about the methods and sources the European consortium utilizes to collect its data.

Airbus claims the presentation, as well as its competitive intelligence gathering methods, fully comply with all laws. Though when approached about how the information was gathered, Airbus declined to address it specifically, suggesting that a lot of data labelled BOEING PROPRIETARY is freely available online. Airbus added that not all documents labelled BOEING PROPRIETARY are in fact proprietary. A spokesman emphasized that Airbus closely watches the market to draw its own conclusions, as do its competitors.

A search engine query for "Boeing Proprietary PPT" did not yield the slides in question.

Boeing Called A Target Of French Spy Effort

The Boeing Co. was among the targets of a French government plan for a massive spying effort to learn U.S. technological secrets and trade strategies, according to classified documents.

The plan targeted 49 high-tech companies, 24 financial institutions and six U.S. government agencies with important roles in international trade, the French documents show.

The plan focused on research breakthroughs and marketing strategies of leading-edge U.S. aerospace and defense contractors that compete directly with French firms.

The French also sought advance knowledge of the bargaining positions of American negotiators in trade talks involving France. The 21-page assignment sheet, prepared by the French equivalent of the Central Intelligence Agency, is considered authentic by senior U.S. experts.

Why We Spy on Our Allies

That's right, my continental friends, we have spied on you because you bribe. Your companies' products are often more costly, less technically advanced or both, than your American competitors'. As a result you bribe a lot. So complicit are your governments that in several European countries bribes still are tax-deductible.

When we have caught you at it, you might be interested, we haven't said a word to the U.S. companies in the competition. Instead we go to the government you're bribing and tell its officials that we don't take kindly to such corruption. They often respond by giving the most meritorious bid (sometimes American, sometimes not) all or part of the contract. This upsets you, and sometimes creates recriminations between your bribers and the other country's bribees, and this occasionally becomes a public scandal. ...

Why do you bribe? It's not because your companies are inherently more corrupt. Nor is it because you are inherently less talented at technology. It is because your economic patron saint is still Jean Baptiste Colbert, whereas ours is Adam Smith. In spite of a few recent reforms, your governments largely still dominate your economies, so you have much greater difficulty than we in innovating, encouragin

The European Parliament:

[Hartree]

And especially the French representatives were shocked, SHOCKED, that the US is conducting spying operations against allies.

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/09/14/news/14iht-spy_.html

Why, it's almost as unbelievable as if Israel was conducting spying operations against the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Pollard

To put this in perspective, note that the resolution that was passed is a non-binding one. "Twiddle, diddle and resolve"

How to make the U.S. spy harder

[SuperKendall]

Problem: U.S. is spying on you.

Solution: Take away the one channel of data they did not have to spy for, thereby increasing the need for the U.S. to implement new spying...

Profit:??