EU Court of Justice Declares US-EU Data Transfer Pact Invalid

Sique writes: Europe's highest court ruled on Tuesday that a widely used international agreement for moving people's digital data between the European Union and the United States was invalid. The decision, by the European Court of Justice, throws into doubt how global technology giants like Facebook and Google can collect, manage and analyze online information from their millions of users in the 28-member bloc. The court decreed that the data-transfer agreement was invalid as of Tuesday's ruling. New submitter nava68 adds links to coverage at the Telegraph; also at TechWeek Europe. From TechWeek Europe's article: The ruling was the court’s final decision in a data-protection case brought by 27-year-old Austrian law student Max Schrems against the Irish data protection commissioner. That case, in turn, was spurred by Schrems’ concerns over the collection of his personal data by Facebook, whose European headquarters is in Ireland, and the possibility that the data was being handed over to US intelligence services.

Comments

Obvious ruling

[Anonymous Coward]

The court simply stated what looks obvious to anyone in good faith: if you do business in a country, you have to abide by the local laws. And given Snowden's revelations, it's purely ridiculous to claim that privacy rights can be respected if foreign data are stored in the US.

So google, facebook, twitter, microsoft, cloud computing services, etc... will have to open their wallets and create data centers inside single EU countries. Otherwise GTFO.

Technology must respect the law, not the other way around. Sorry billionaire nerds.

Re:Obvious ruling

[Anonymous Coward]

It is really worse than that. Don't forget those court cases (Microsoft is involved in one now) where the US Justice Department believes (and the courts seem to agree so far) that data from email stored in Ireland can be handed over to the US government simply because Microsoft owns the servers and the US can then compel Microsoft to expatriate the data to the US. This seems ridiculous on the face of it - but it shows that there is more to your statement about saying that Google, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft, etc. need to have data centers in EU countries. They would still fall afoul of this since the US seems to think that they can just take the data by hounding the company. In order to fully comply and protect people, these companies will likely need to form business relationships with wholly owned in Europe companies to host data for them and for the US based companies to have absolutely no control over the servers. This will disrupt things like cloud service update plans ("we are rolling out an update to all users now, except in Europe where our business partners will do it next week").

Re:Obvious ruling

[rmdingler]

And given Snowden's revelations, it's purely ridiculous to claim that privacy rights can be respected if foreign data are stored in the US.

It's pretty ridiculous to claim privacy rights can be respected with regard to personal information stored anywhere.

Do you reasonably suspect the surveillance powers will have any problem crossing imaginary lines in the dirt?

Re:Obvious ruling

[pnutjam]

Just wait, the TPP will strip.. er... I mean standardize all privacy rights.

Re:Obvious ruling

[Anonymous Coward]

No, but if the companies in question are found to be colluding with criminal organizations like the NSA then they can and should be sued into oblivion. Their replacement will then be more inclined not to help the criminals. Hence the general public of Europe's data will be better protected, which is the goal of data protection legislation.

Re:Obvious ruling

[Zocalo]

Google, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft, and most of the other cloud computing services, already *have* data centres in the EU, so they can get into full compliance "simply" by ensuring that no applicable EU citizen data leaves those data centres. In Microsoft's case this is probably excellent news since they now have another argument they can use to avoid the US DoJ's attempts to compel them to hand over emails they have in their Dublin DC. It's the smaller US companies that are probably going to take the brunt of this - the one that don't currently have any servers in the EU.

It's probably a good day to be a CoLo provider with spare capacity in the EU...

Re:Obvious ruling

[mysidia]

host data for them and for the US based companies to have absolutely no control over the servers.

Not the servers; the physical servers are irrelevent. For the US based companies to have absolutely no access to the decryption keys that are used to protect user files.... they can use that by performing decryptions in a HSM which is physically tied to a location

At that point, the only thing the US government could order them to do would be to modify DNS entries to route users' traffic through the US or make specific modifications the internals of their websites' application code to expose a backdoor (or generate a datafeed) for authorities, and implement that backdoor in all versions of their site, no matter what provider is hosting their site.

Re:Obvious ruling

[AmiMoJo]

It's about choice. We want to choose who fucks us, not be raped by whoever happens by.

Re:Obvious ruling

[fnj]

the companies in question are found to be colluding with criminal organizations like the NSA

I like the way you express yourself. The problem is that every citizen of the United States is in collusion with a rogue illegitimate government operating in blatant disregard for its own goddam Constitution and in open enmity to the people, for countenancing this abomination of an oligarchy without rising up and overthrowing it. Certainly the voters are, every time they vote for an establishment cog to be part of the vast conspiracy.

Just to make it clear that this is an observation, not a rallying cry, I am too, because I can't even imagine myself in open rebellion. Such is the way the ascendancy of evil undermines vitality.

Re:Obvious ruling

[Xest]

"It's the smaller US companies that are probably going to take the brunt of this - the one that don't currently have any servers in the EU."

Actually I'm not sure that that's the case. If a company operates only in the US (e.g. is headquartered there, only makes money there, only has staff there), but an EU citizen gives them their data, then the EU citizen is effectively accepting that their data will be held under the US' weaker data protection regime.

The problem here is that Google, Facebook et. al have set up European subsidiaries for tax dodging purposes and so EU citizens are interacting with EU subsidiaries who are held to EU data protection standards. Those subsidiaries cannot make the decision for users to send their data to weaker data protection regimes - only the users themselves can opt to do that.

Re:Obvious ruling

[FlyHelicopters]

You can't imagine open rebellion because you're well fed, you're actually pretty safe, and you live in a very well off nation.

There isn't going to be a civil war in the US any time soon, people are happy with their food and TV...

Re:Obvious ruling

[fnj]

Correct. Of course. That goes without saying. UNTIL it crosses the line. It always crosses the line. Their ponzi scheme for keeping everyone fat collapses, or the repression touches too many of the wrong nerves.

Re:Obvious ruling

[ultranova]

There isn't going to be a civil war in the US any time soon, people are happy with their food and TV...

There wouldn't be a civil war in the US any time soon if people got food and TV (or the Internet, get with the times). What they instead get is crushing debt and foreclosure notices, along with a government everyone, regardless of their political position, can agree sucks donkey balls. And it's getting ever worse, with no hope in sight.

Now, I don't know if there's going to be a civil war in the US, but something is going to give.

Re:Obvious ruling

[bickerdyke]

Sounds still the same to me as IIRC US Tax laws work exactly that way. Big companies can avoid US taxes by keeping their revenues from other countries outside the US. Guess why Apple took a credit do pay dividends to its shareholders? It was cheaper to pay for the cvredit than to repatriate money from their offshore company.

Re:Obvious ruling

[NostalgiaForInfinity]

And given Snowden's revelations, it's purely ridiculous to claim that privacy rights can be respected if foreign data are stored in the US.

If a European stores his data on a US computer, yes, the NSA may snoop on it. If you store it on a European computer, European governments will snoop on it, guaranteed. Who do you think is more likely to cause problems for you, the NSA or your own government? Which government actually has jurisdiction over you?

So google, facebook, twitter, microsoft, cloud computing services, etc... will have to open their wallets and create data centers inside single EU countries.

Yes, protectionism is one reason the EU is pushing so much for this. The other reason is to keep the online data of Europeans in Europe where it is easily accessible to European spy and law enforcement agencies.

Otherwise GTFO.

They may do that. Of course, that doesn't mean Europeans will stop using their services.

Re:Obvious ruling

[tnk1]

From what I have seen, there is no need to form European subsidiaries. American businesses just need to adopt the EU model clauses for European data. It's a pain in the ass, but not much will probably change.

Re:Obvious ruling

[tnk1]

It is a problem if the US business has EU customers. Not that the US business can be sued, but the EU customer may be a business itself, who then is sued by their employees if the personal data is removed from the EU.

That means that the EU businesses might be forced to drop US businesses if they can't comply or open a European subsidiary.

Re:Obvious ruling

[tnk1]

google, facebook, twitter, microsoft, cloud computing services etc... will have to open their wallets and create data centers inside single EU countries.

These businesses already have data centers inside the EU. This doesn't affect them except for some new language and maybe some documentation adjustments.

Re:Obvious ruling

[Cinnamon Beige]

The solution to that particular problem is obvious: Megacorp does not, in fact, do business in the EU but rather has licensed everything EU-related to a company named MiniMus. The fact that MiniMus is a wholly-owned (or practically-so) subsidiary is beside the point, as it'd still be legally another company...and the Megacorp can rightfully say that they'd love to comply but that data is MiniMus's property. The overall result would be that there'd be a very annoyed judge wondering why the US DoJ even bothered him with trying to get the court orders issued.

This doesn't solve the issue of whose laws apply when the data is moving internationally, especially when it comes to things like "Who has jurisdiction?" if we're talking about things that are legal only in one of the countries. For example, do we go with the server/seller for setting it, meaning that somebody in the US is perfectly safe obtaining works not in the public domain in the US from servers/sellers located in countries where they are? Do we insist on both ends here, so if it's illegal in one then it's illegal throughout? Do countries the data merely travels through have a say, especially since that might be hard to determine exactly?

Re:Obvious ruling

[towermac]

And this is in response to the US insisting it can subpoena Microsoft's data in Ireland because MS is a US company.

I'm not sure why the US government is getting so arrogant over some things lately; we have never had that sort of power over the pond. In the aftermath of WWII, while our dollars are pouring in for rebuilding, while they were scared to death of the Soviets; they still often told us to go pound sand on many occasions.

I mean good for them; they need to maintain some semblance of sovereignty or apply for statehood. I definitely don't want most of their crazy politics over here, and I want that respect to go both ways.

Re:Obvious ruling

[KGIII]

Meh... They'll just put their servers on US soil. Then the onus is on the EU to prevent access if they want. Reality is that this will probably mean nothing in the end.

Re:Obvious ruling

[KGIII]

While true, beer and circuses go a long ways to pushing that into the future.

Re:Obvious ruling

[Zontar The Mindless]

Possibly not, but the recipient surely does.

Re:Obvious ruling

[Ryanrule]

no, if a eq user accesses facebook, they are doing business whereever the server is located.

Re:Obvious ruling

[MikeKD]

Just wait, the TPP will strip.. er... I mean standardize all privacy rights.

Harmonize. The euphemism is "harmonize".

Re: Obvious ruling

[fyngyrz]

In Montana, it's "Uber's Butte"

Re:Obvious ruling

[EvilAlphonso]

Companies found in breach of data protection regulations can be fined up to 5% of annual revenue, and the local management can get jailed for 20 days. 20 days doesn't seem much, but it is enough to hurt their job prospects for the next five years in regulated markets. That means basically that they can't work for payment institutions, insurance companies, banks, companies storing personal data, companies sub-contracting for the preceding, ..., in most of Europe until the conviction gets "time barred" after 5 years.

Of course, if the company has no local office in Europe it isn't a risk.

Re:Obvious ruling

[Luckyo]

Good reference: Arab spring. Countries that went nuts were among the wealthiest in the region. All it took was a push and a large amount of young men wanting better life that current social mobility could give them.

Re:Obvious ruling

[Luckyo]

I'm interested in how you will spin this particular tirade of yours when you actually read the OP and notice that this wasn't initiated by EU, but by a concerned citizen.

Re:Obvious ruling

[KGIII]

We've got a ways to go before we get to the level of their society that made them finally make that choice. It's likely to happen but not likely to happen in my lifetime. I'd rather it be resolved peacefully but, well, what do I know?

Re:Obvious ruling

[IcyWolfy]

US Courts have generally decided that the point of sale is where the customer is located, not the server. Hence sales tax is taxed at the customer's location, and not the server location (otherwise the original idea of putting servers / warehouses in states with no sales-tax would have continued to work).

Re:Obvious ruling

[KGIII]

That's what I expect them to do. "So long, suckers." With the ability to host anything anywhere they don't really have to comply with this. The more difficult it is, the more likely they'll simply move servers to a new location and drop the office and encourage staff to relocate.

Re:Obvious ruling

[currently_awake]

The countries affected by "Arab Spring" all had to cut key subsidies to the middle class and poor due to the economic collapse. People lose their "bread and circus", they riot. Politics and wanting a better life were not formative factors.

Re:Obvious ruling

[david_thornley]

As far as I could tell, Microsoft US had full access to that data, even when it was stored in servers in Ireland, and the judge ordered US people working for a US company to hand over data they could freely access. There is no way data freely accessible from the US is going to be properly safeguarded by EU standards.

Re:Obvious ruling

[NostalgiaForInfinity]

I'm interested in how you will spin this particular tirade of yours when you actually read the OP and notice that this wasn't initiated by EU, but by a concerned citizen.

I know the history of the lawsuit. How do you think it affects anything I said?

Re:Obvious ruling

[a_n_d_e_r_s]

And thus break US law ? Don't think so.
Either they break US law or they break EU laws.

Last time something like this happend. Google left China.

Now the corporations has to decide. Leave the US or leave EU.

Re:Obvious ruling

[a_n_d_e_r_s]

And then EU will block their websites. And any EU corporation using them will probably be facing fines.

No, it won't work. You can't really expect to get away from breaking EU law in the US.

EU companies will take all business.

Re:Obvious ruling

[a_n_d_e_r_s]

As long as Minimus is a wholly owned subsidarey they US courts expect Megacorp to be able to tell minimus what to do.

Its happend before. and will happen again.

So. no, its not an option. They will have to sever ties.

Re:Obvious ruling

[dunkelfalke]

Just FYI, the Red Scare was far, far stronger on your side of the pond (and in a very insular nation that is European in name only, but they seem to be scared of everything not of their island).

Re:Obvious ruling

[Luckyo]

If you genuinely think that neither politics nor desire for better life were formative factors in Arab spring, you either lived under a rock for last decade, are severely autistic or are just plain trolling.

Re:Obvious ruling

[Luckyo]

Since you are apparently not the one writing your own posts, allow me to quote you:

"Yes, protectionism is one reason the _EU_ is pushing so much for this."

Re:Obvious ruling

[KGIII]

I suspect it will matter where the customer chooses to put their data. In other words they'll go to a site based in the US (or somewhere else, probably) and do their transactions there. I see lots of problems with their attempt - it's noble and all but there are all sorts of ways that folks *may* try to work around it. If the people don't care then they'll just work around it. If they do care then this might be a success. We'll have to see.

Re:Obvious ruling

[NostalgiaForInfinity]

"Yes, protectionism is one reason the _EU_ is pushing so much for this."

It may surprise you, but the EU is actually not quite a Borg collective yet, and what you are seeing here is a struggle between two internal factions, one of which wants slightly more freedom for EU citizens, and the other of which wants more totalitarian control. As has been historically the case, the latter faction uses anti-Americanism and anti-corporatism as arguments. And the latter faction is obviously making headway, which is, of course, business as usual in Europe.

(You know what other very successful Austrian came to power on a platform of protecting Europe from the predations of evil American corporations and capitalism?)

Re:Obvious ruling

[ale2011]

A key difference between our (US and EU alike) governors and Arab caliphs is that the former are not going to go over the top to preserve their personal power. Consider Al Gore after Florida vote, for example. Had Assad, Gaddafi, or Mubarak accepted to step down peacefully, their people wouldn't have had to suffer that much.

While we feature democratic governments, we miss democracy in workplaces. That way, Megacorp can corrupt US and EU governors alike, and do what the hell they like. Sentences like this are more of a palliative than a cure, yet better than nothing.

Re:Obvious ruling

[Luckyo]

So you knew you were talking BS, you agree that you were talking BS, and then you still decided to continue talking the same BS?

Really now. First you admit that EU has no firm unified stance, then you proceed to tell us about firm unified EU stance.

Amazing amount of double think.

This ruling won't fix anything

[Richard_at_work]

Simply keeping the data in the EU won't fix anything so long as that data is still being held by US controlled entities, as those entities will still be forced to hand over the data regardless of where it is (lets face it, Microsofts battle against that particular issue is destined to fail).

The only real way this is going to be solved is to force all EU data to be stored by entities that are not owned or controlled by a non-EU entity. Which means Amazon SaRL will be unconnected to Amazon.com and effectively competing against each other.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[Intrepid imaginaut]

If they're forced to hand over the data they won't be in business in the EU for long, which considering the enormous size and wealth of the EU is going to hurt any company badly, so I guess they'll have to open seperate competing European branches. Either that or the US government is going to have to play nice with the rest of the world.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[currently_awake]

You don't understand how this works. The NSA will ask their Euro allies to get the data for them, therefore ensuring continued access.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[Fire_Wraith]

Assuming you're correct about Microsoft's challenge to the US Justice Department on that, then it brings things to a rather interesting head. What happens then? If US companies can't move Europeans' data to the US, it seems to me that these companies will be forced to choose between:

A) Operating in the European Union
B) Keeping their headquarters in the US/being a US company

When push comes to shove, I'm inclined to think they'll all bail out for Ireland or whereever, and leave their operations in the Valley as a subsidiary.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[locofungus]

Simply keeping the data in the EU won't fix anything so long as that data is still being held by US controlled entities, as those entities will still be forced to hand over the data regardless of where it is>

NO! This isn't the case.

What each entity will have to do is separately agree contracts with the relevant data protection registrar (default contracts exists) as to how they will protect that data.

Those contracts will have "get outs" for providing data to law enforcement under warrant. What will be prevented is the wholesale transfer of data to other parties the US. This was supposed to have been prevented anyway - the companies self certified that they were abiding by the relevant EU data protection laws - that data would only be used for the purpose it was gathered for and, if it was passed on to any other parties, those parties would be contractually obligated to follow the same terms.

What this ruling has said is that the "safe harbour" self-certifying regime is not sufficient for data being sent to the US and companies will have to agree individual contracts (with legal and financial consequences if they then violate them)

For the big operators this isn't going to be such a big deal anyway (unless they're secretly handing everything over to the NSA when it will hurt if/when that is uncovered) but it's going to be a right royal pain for smaller companies that may, for example, export payroll data to the US head office for processing.

Furthermore, there's no problem with EU citizens exporting their data to the US - so buying things on a US website, giving name address etc, won't be a problem UNLESS that company operates its servers in the EU. The EU data protection directive basically restricts what OTHERS can do with an individuals personal information to that which is strictly required to complete whatever process it was gathered for.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[Schmorgluck]

Except we still have vestiges of due process here in the EU.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[Schmorgluck]

Will an EU company be allowed to manage US data?

In compliance of US laws and regulations, of course. For example, by following US data privacy laws... oh, right, there's no such thing, my bad.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[PolygamousRanchKid]

I don't have any problems with the US spooks asking an EU spook for the data from a specific suspected Muslim terrorist. The EU spook would probably comply, due to sharing agreements that are already in place.

However, what the NSA does, is to simply harvest anything they want from anyone. I am not comfortable with that. And I don't believe an EU spook would set up a system enabling such universal access. If the EU spook can say the data was harvested outside the EU by the NSA, the EU spook has no problems. If the EU spook enables harvesting . . . we will see the EU spook in court.

Note that Snowden's revelations did not result in any legal action in the US, despite that the NSA is clearly violating the law. This decision by the EU court is the only legal action that I know of.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[rmdingler]

You don't understand how this works. The NSA will ask their Euro allies to get the data for them, therefore ensuring continued access.

Full Disclosure: Optimistic USian here, still behind prodding my government back to a place worthy of repect in the World...

but, if we don't improve out international reputation, we won't long have as many European allies.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[gstoddart]

Simply keeping the data in the EU won't fix anything so long as that data is still being held by US controlled entities, as those entities will still be forced to hand over the data regardless of where it is (lets face it, Microsofts battle against that particular issue is destined to fail).

And then those entities will be in violation of EU law, and will end up paying massive fines or other penalties ... which would hopefully be severe. So severe as to cripple the companies.

See, no matter what the US believes, they can't trump the EU law. So if Microsoft's battle to not hand over this data fails, Microsoft in Europe will fail. It really is that simple.

And at the end of the day, the corporations are going go realize they can't jeopardize their revenue by pulling out of those markets.

The US doesn't get to pass laws which trump local laws any more than Iran does. And the US can't exempt those entities from local laws, which means this will come down to corporate self interest versus a government who feels it is entitled to collect this information.

So the bottom line is: too damned bad for the US, because once Microsoft in Europe starts getting fined billions of dollars and people start getting thrown in jail, they're very quickly going to realize they can't do it.

It really is about time the world tells the US that our privacy and legally protected rights don't take a back seat to US security interests. We don't give a shit what the US wants.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[wvmarle]

I was hoping this would also put an end to airliners having to share heaps of personal information with the US government about anyone flying to the US, transiting at any US airport (without entering the country) or even just flying through US airspace.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[fnj]

Optimistic USian here, still behind prodding my government back to a place worthy of repect in the World

You don't think Trump or any of the other likely Republican contenders would fundamentally change this stuff, do you? I happen to believe Cruz and possibly Paul would have some effect, but neither one has a snowball's chance in hell of getting anywhere. Certainly Clinton or Biden would wholeheartedly continue the lowering of the dark curtain over the U.S. Sanders I think would try to make meaningful changes but get nowhere against Congress.

if we don't improve out international reputation, we won't long have as many European allies

The U.S. is already a sick joke throughout the world, including Europe. This declaration reinforces that.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[fnj]

being a US company

These gigantic corporations are not "U.S. companies" by any stretch of the imagination - if that term even has any meaning at all any more. They are me-first entities whose only allegiance is to themselves, and they operate globally with complete cynicism. If they can't defy regulations in secret (VW?) or win their case in court (Microsoft) or co-opt authorities and get regulations changed openly or behind the curtain, they will accommodate the players who are large enough that their citizens and corporations can't be forgone as customers. And that certainly includes both Europe and the U.S.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

It's important to note the ruling did not judge if the US satisfied its requirements from the EU w.r.t. data handling. The ruling just loudly notes the NSA and any other legal entity may ignore those rules at will, so they are meaningless, and hence the EU commission was wrong to issue a judgement blanket approving the US.

There was also legal wrangling that a national commission (e.g. Ireland's, in this case) may examine protections independently of commission judgements (a clarification on how the protection enforcement rules are set up), and if it conflicts with a commission judgement, may kick it up to the EU court even if it cannot directly overrule the EU commission. This allowed the Irish high court to challenge the blanket US approval by doing just that.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[NostalgiaForInfinity]

"Due process" applies to legal proceedings, not to espionage or national security. When it comes to espionage and national security, European citizens have fewer protections from their governments than Americans have from the US government. Countries like Germany scan every E-mail, phone call, and text message they can get their hands on for keywords, limited only by technology, and have done so for decades; it's not even a secret, it's just not talked about much in the press.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[NostalgiaForInfinity]

However, what the NSA does, is to simply harvest anything they want from anyone. I am not comfortable with that.

Nor am I. But the BND, DGSI, or MI5/GCHQ do the same thing. You can't avoid your data being harvested by someone. The question you should ask yourself which spy agency can cause you more problems when they make a mistake, and that is probably your own domestic spy agency. That's why storing data outside the country is a good idea: it becomes more accessible to foreign spy agencies but less accessible to your own.

That's, of course, also the real reason the EU hates it when Europeans use US servers.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[sociocapitalist]

Which means Amazon SaRL will be unconnected to Amazon.com and effectively competing against each other.

Which will never happen because then Amazon.com would have to actually pay taxes.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[Ryanrule]

but what was going on was the EU spook was HARVESTING data for the US, in exchange for access to the NSA data pie. clean your own house.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[Ryanrule]

the eu people want the us services more than they want privacy.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[fyngyrz]

When it comes to espionage and national security, European citizens have fewer protections from their governments than Americans have from the US government.

That'd be great, if the US government actually complied with those protections in a more significant manner than lip service.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[EvilAlphonso]

Ever heard of Prism?

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[EvilAlphonso]

It's refreshing to see someone who has at least some knowledge of the data protection regulations.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[Luckyo]

Swedes tried this. They really did.

In about two decades, they went from Palme to Bildt. US has extreme amount of ability to unseat politicians they do not like and replace them with those they do when they need it. Results were very visible in everything ranging from Sweden's eroded political neutrality to things like incarceration of people US didn't like (i.e. Pirate Bay case, "inappropriate sexual conduct" charges against Assange). From most vocally neutral to most Finlandized country in Europe in just a couple of decades.

Believe me when I say this, you do not want the evil juggernaut that is US security and intelligence apparatus turning on politicians in your country. They will not last long.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[Schmorgluck]

Assange hasn't been charged for "inappropriate sexual conduct" but for rape. He even admitted to the facts. Aside from that, honestly, I really admire the Swedes' tranquil and laid-back democracy, their ability for dialog, the relative humility of their politicians. But I'm French. It's not a good idea to try to hijack France. It may result in uncanny alliances of angry people.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[NostalgiaForInfinity]

Yes. What are you trying to get at? PRISM is relatively new and politically controversial, as opposed to Europe's long running and uncontroversial programs. Furthermore, PRISM still seems to have more legal protections than European spy programs.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[Luckyo]

Not only that, but original prosecutor laughed the woman out of his office as her story obviously didn't meet even Swedish standards. Then "suddenly" prosecutor was changed in a couple of weeks and current situation started.

Could be that it had nothing to do with it. Or it could be that what diplomatic cables stated about Sweden and its leading politicians were dead on.

Re:This ruling won't fix anything

[Schmorgluck]

My bad, then. He didn't engage in intercourse while she was asleep, after all? Because without prior agreement, it's rape, on every jurisdiction I know of. Yes, in France too.

self-certify?

[gbjbaanb]

The BBC reports

The EU forbids personal data from being transferred to and processed in parts of the world that do not provide "adequate" privacy protections.

So, to make it easier for US firms - including the tech giants - to function, Safe Harbour was introduced to let them self-certify that they are carrying out the required steps.

More than 5,000 US companies make use of the arrangement to facilitate data transfers

self-certify that they're completely above-board and that no privacy is being invaded.. says Google and Facebook.

I guess all that will happen is that these companies will open EU offices to scour though all our stuff instead of sending it to an American datacentre. Plus ca change!

Re:TTIP declares...

[Chrisq]

... All euro courts are invalid. Seriously, eurosluts, what do you think you can do? Where are your carriers? Har har har.

Yes but we'll laugh back when highly polluting VWs have to be accepted on US roads because they meet European standards

Laughable

[Crashmarik]

If you take this at face value the best result will be less security for everyone's data, as there will be more vectors to attack to access it.

If you look at what the real motivation is, namely the EU trying once again to shake down google and facebook, modest bribes will rectify the problem.

Re:Laughable

[TheGratefulNet]

any western government (not the US) who is trying to 'shake down' google or FB gets my 100% blessing in anything they do to reduce the force, power and evilness of both of those companies.

anything that causes either of those companies PAIN is a good thing in my, uhm, 'book'.

corporations are evil and the biggest ones have the most evilness to them. anything that knocks down the evil corps even a little is a Good Thing(tm).

Re:Laughable

[PolygamousRanchKid]

If you look at how this law case started, it was initiated by a private citizen. Not by the EU executive branch. The EU justice branch made a decision that the EU justice branch is visibly not comfortable with, because it places a lot of companies in legal limbo. Read more here:

http://www.economist.com/news/...

Because the EU executive branch did nothing about it themselves . . . well, it shows that they were in cahoots with the USA/NSA folks.

So in this case, it is not a shakedown by the EU. The EU governments and Executive branch were perfectly happy with the way things were. It was a private citizen who appealed to the EU highest court that caused this.

Re:Laughable

[Schmorgluck]

Nope, the real motivation is compliance to EU laws, like every company has to. Companies who believe they can fully own data about EU citizens and do whatever they want with it are in for a lot of trouble, whatever their nationality. European companies, and even governments, have been condemned too.

Re:Laughable

[Crashmarik]

any western government (not the US) who is trying to 'shake down' google or FB gets my 100% blessing in anything they do to reduce the force, power and evilness of both of those companies.

anything that causes either of those companies PAIN is a good thing in my, uhm, 'book'.

corporations are evil and the biggest ones have the most evilness to them. anything that knocks down the evil corps even a little is a Good Thing(tm).

Your anger is nothing short of madness. Sure hate Google, I mean those bastards giving away search and indexing services that used to cost hundreds of dollars/hour to use.

https://books.google.com/books...

Ooh there is a reason to hate them. They made it trivially easy for me to destroy your position.

Re:Laughable

[Crashmarik]

It's amazing how if you look at things through a narrow window they look like one thing

https://www.google.com/search?...

When you take a look at the broader view things look a little different.

Re:Laughable

[Crashmarik]

You are talking about Facebook here. Think about it.

Re:Laughable

[Anonymous Coward]

It gets even better once you put on a tin foil hat, stick your head out of the window and start shouting in tongues.

Re:Laughable

[Crashmarik]

It gets even better once you put on a tin foil hat, stick your head out of the window and start shouting in tongues.

Do you have video of you doing that ?

Re:Laughable

[fnj]

Google is just doing what any corporation does. The bottom line is their own aggrandizement. Anything they can get away with to that end they will do. Why do you have this fantasy that they are special?

Capitalism is all about strife and self-interest. It's inherent in the system. You can but-but that by bringing up the "invisible hand of the market", but it is a truism.

Re:Laughable

[Crashmarik]

Google is just doing what any corporation does. The bottom line is their own aggrandizement. Anything they can get away with to that end they will do. Why do you have this fantasy that they are special?

Capitalism is all about strife and self-interest. It's inherent in the system. You can but-but that by bringing up the "invisible hand of the market", but it is a truism.

No they aren't special. No more so than the petroleum company that provides you insanely cheap energy, the coal and power company that provide you cheap power, the agribusinesses that make food available to you at ridiculously low prices.

Why do you want to hate them for making your life better ?

Re:Laughable

[Crashmarik]

LOL at first I was wondering what conspiracy you were talking about, then I realized you think EU politicians aren't corrupt. Really I didn't think anyone out of a nursery could be that naive.

Re:Laughable

[fnj]

Do you have a point, or are you just butthurt that not everyone has the same starry-eyed worship for capitalism?

You sure as HELL don't seem to be conversant with what it takes to pay the unconscionably through-the-roof costs of feeding yourself and warming yourself in the winter. Food prices and heating oil prices are through the roof. I don't thank selfish bastards for making themselves rich at my unavoidable expense. It's called realism, son.

Re:Laughable

[sociocapitalist]

It was a private citizen who appealed to the EU highest court that caused this.

Who is unfortunately probably now on the US 'no fly list' for life.

Re:Laughable

[tnk1]

In the olden days, you fed yourself by killing your own food and finding your own firewood. While that was "free", you had to find it, transport it, prepare it, store it, and just about everything else.

Now, you get that stuff piped to your house, or you might actually have to go to a store and get it. Even poor people have the possibility of comforts that even rich people didn't have in the past.

I agree that the prices can strain the ability for us to keep up with them, but even this capitalist world is an objectively and qualitatively better place to live, despite its shortcomings. Unless you like hunting your own food, of course.

Would a "social democracy" be better? Maybe, but we've seen it has pitfalls too.

The point is, nothing is free, you're going to pay one way or another. It's a matter of choosing how you you do it.

Re:Laughable

[Crashmarik]

The only person who seems to be butthurt here is you.

You seem extremely upset that other people do better in life than you do. You should look in the mirror for the source of your problems

Re:PNR

[Schmorgluck]

There are separate agreements for those. They haven't been challenged yet.

An opportunity for tighter NSA-GCHQ cooperation

[cpghost]

Basically, doesn't this means that data will be stored in EU data centers, e.g. in Ireland, UK etc..., where it will be (more or less) lawfully intercepted by British GCHQ and handed over to the NSA based on the Five Eyes Agreement? So this ruling won't change anything fundamental for the spying a.k.a. mass surveillance of EU citizens. The NSA, instead of siphoning the data from data centers in the US, will just have to route the traffic through a couple of big VPN pipes via GCHQ from data centers in the EU. Or does anyone really thinks that mass surveillance will suddenly be curbed because of a (supreme) court order in EU land?

Re:Add all Europeans to the Do Not Fly List and De

[Schmorgluck]

You're speaking like Mutual Economic Destruction would be a victory. You're funny.

What about the Windows 10 builtin spyware?

[ArsenneLupin]

... and what about the spyware built-in to Windows 10. Will European companies still be allowed to use Windows 10 if it will regularly transmit all keystrokes (including passwords, and customer data) to the mothership in the US?

Re: An opportunity for tighter NSA-GCHQ cooperatio

[cpghost]

You miss a major thing about the NSA: it's designed to hoover up foreign intelligence, and forbidden from doing so domestically. Putting EU data in EU silos makes it easier for the NSA legally: no one can object that they're stealing US citizens' data. An EU silo is totally, awesomely fair game for them to hijack.

Indeed! It's much more easier to bypass all those pesky FISC procedures. Up to now, NSA had to do some pretty heavy vetting to distinguish between US and non-US Persons; EU persons self-segregating themselves out of the pool of people stored in US data centers makes it much more easier for the NSA.

That's an excellent example of the law of unintended consequences.

Helps Cloud Providers

[ranton]

I assume this ruling helps US cloud providers since even more small companies will be compelled to not host their own servers. I can easily spin up servers on AWS in Ireland and Frankfurt, but not so easily set up my own data center.

Its rare for any increase in regulation to not help large companies, since they have the scale to deal with the lawyer fees necessary to comply.

Re:Helps Cloud Providers

[NostalgiaForInfinity]

I assume this ruling helps US cloud providers since even more small companies will be compelled to not host their own servers.

If I have no business presence in the EU, my payments are processed in the US, and my servers are in the US, why would it make any difference to me what the EU wants or what the US rules are?

Re:Helps Cloud Providers

[IcyWolfy]

If you provide a digital service to a European citizen, you are required to submit VAT payments; as you are completing a sale in the EU. (Much like how the US treats the customer's location as the point of sale, in determining tax-rates, applicable laws, etc.)

Thus, in this case, you will be breaking the law in Europe.
Which is perfectly fine if you don't have any intention of ever stepping foot in Europe.
Or are not evading taxes to such an extent that the EU decides to extradite you.

Re:Helps Cloud Providers

[currently_awake]

Maybe. If a Euro citizen comes to the US and buys a car, the Euro governments get no taxes. If your servers are in the USA and your terms of service claim all transactions are done in the USA then you can claim the same, they came into US jurisdiction.

Re:Helps Cloud Providers

[NostalgiaForInfinity]

Thus, in this case, you will be breaking the law in Europe

Oooh, I'm shaking in my boots! European nations aren't even capable of enforcing VAT domestically. Tax evasion is rampant across society in many European nations.

as you are completing a sale in the EU

In what sense? The service I provide is in the US, and so is the payment processing. For physical goods, it's the customer's responsibility to pay import duty at the point of import. I have nothing to do with that.

If the EU ever were stupid enough to make a big deal out of this, it would blow up in their face, as the entire EU VAT setup is anti-competitive and protectionist.

Which is perfectly fine if you don't have any intention of ever stepping foot in Europe.

Don't tempt me.

Re:Helps Cloud Providers

[a_n_d_e_r_s]

You won't be a problem. EU will just block access to your website.

Doesn't matter if you are Microsoft or Amazon. As long as you are an evil corporation not abiding by the EU laws you will get stopped.

Re:Helps Cloud Providers

[NostalgiaForInfinity]

You won't be a problem. EU will just block access to your website.

US companies have been required to pay VAT for EU customers since 2003, and there are tons of companies that don't pay VAT for the European customers. Have any of them be blocked? Where exactly would they be blocked?

As long as you are an evil corporation not abiding by the EU laws you will get stopped.

The EU is incapable of even stopping its own evil corporations.

Doesn't matter if you are Microsoft or Amazon.

Microsoft and Amazon pay VAT because they are European corporations (subsidiaries).

Re:They will be a muslem country in a few years.

[kilfarsnar]

The European union will be isis by the time they are done.

Looking at some of the appeasers here it wouldn't surprise me

Wow, you guys have really been taken in by the US media's propaganda. They want you to be afraid. A frightened populace is a controllable populace.

Do you really not see how the fear of Muslim terrorists has been used to curtail your freedoms and tighten control of the authorities? We now have the NSA and who knows who else spying on everyone, the FBI looking at what you read, border checkpoints miles from any border and police using evidence collected in secret, all in the name of protecting us from terrorists.

Terrorists use violence to put fear into a population. Well who is really putting fear into our population? The media and the government spokespeople who feed them information. They want you to be afraid so you'll support their wars (that they lie to us about) and their restrictive policies at home, and keep watching their news channels. Don't fall for it.

Re:They will be a muslem country in a few years.

[Krojack]

Wow, you guys have really been taken in by the US media's propaganda.

I live in the US and I have no clue what you're referring to. These are just idiots. The media here is bad but not this bad or in this way. The extreme right republicans would do this but most of the media is on the left.

Re:Add all Europeans to the Do Not Fly List and De

[Anonymous Coward]

Like a 5 year old having a tantrum, you're saying the economic equivalent of 'The US should blow up the entire world, including itself, and stamp up and down on the bits' because it can't have it's own way. It's a bit sad and also somewhat amusing.
Anyhow, it's time out for you on the naughty step!

Re:if ( NWO = OWG ) squash( dissent );

[JonnyCalcutta]

I know, don't reply to an AC but... what part of the Pacific ocean do you think Europe borders?

Re:Add all Europeans to the Do Not Fly List and De

[ledow]

Er... please do. You'll hurt yourself more than you'll ever hurt us.

In case you haven't noticed, the US is *not* top of quite a lot of things. Even when it is top, the EU is right behind it. Additionally, all those visas are for researchers and people already established to be in short supply in your native population. ANY country in the world would be idiotic to cancel visas like that. That's where the best international talent is choosing to come to your country and contribute to YOUR economy rather than their native one.

Cutting off your nose to spite your face is not an established or recognised economic tactic for a reason.

P.S. "I want your US-based ISP to give all your data to my EU-based company that owns a website that you occasionally log into. Why are you resisting? What's wrong with you? Just give it to me or I'll cancel all your visas!" Notice how STUPID it sounds when you turn it the other way around?

Severing ties with the US would be a net gain on our end. Unfortunately, you only get a net loss on the other or things wouldn't balance. It might also mean that we no longer feel obligated to follow you into wars that had nothing to do with us.

Re:They will be a muslem country in a few years.

[KGIII]

Actually, the fault goes way back to the League of Nations which, though proposed by as I understand, the US was not actually a member of.

Re:They will be a muslem country in a few years.

[kilfarsnar]

so, absolutely zero of those syrian 'refugees' are isis then eh?

How could I, or you, have any idea who any Syrian refugees are? I am not in Syria or any European country. Is it possible? Sure, but so what? What are we afraid is going to happen?

Told you the US uses were illegal

[WillAffleckUW]

Next time listen.

P.S.: Also illegal under the US/Canada Data Treaty. Canadians have constitutional rights to privacy too. They can't sign it away either.

Re:They will be a muslem country in a few years.

[Zontar The Mindless]

If ISIS want to send infiltrators to Europe, they can do it much more quickly, easily, and reliably with a few fake passports and some plane tickets.

Re:They will be a muslem country in a few years.

[kilfarsnar]

Wow, you guys have really been taken in by the US media's propaganda.

I live in the US and I have no clue what you're referring to. These are just idiots. The media here is bad but not this bad or in this way. The extreme right republicans would do this but most of the media is on the left.

At the risk of sounding smug, you aren't supposed to notice. The message management is subtle enough that it's hard to detect. I would recommend the film "Manufacturing Consent" and the "Century of the Self" documentary series. You might also read the book "Propaganda" by Edward Bernays. From Bernays' book:

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.

That's what I'm talking about. Bernays went on to revolutionize the fields of advertising and public relations. His methods work to influence the thoughts, opinions and attitudes of people without their knowledge. They really do work; power now relies on it. Look into it, if you're interested. I find it quite fascinating.

The line

[fyngyrz]

or the repression touches too many of the wrong nerves.

I'm not even sure it has to touch that many. I can think of quite a few cases of government acting in such a way as to really, really upset people. It only takes one really pissed off, skilled, intelligent person do to a great deal of damage. Most dissenters who have taken action thus far have been relatively unskilled and really didn't think through what they were trying to accomplish.

Picking and Choosing

[fyngyrz]

That's an.... interesting... way of looking at it. :/

Re:They will be a muslem country in a few years.

[Luckyo]

As a point of reference, if you think that "most of US media is on the left", you are so far on the right end of the spectrum from European point of view that expression and practice of many of your ideas has been outlawed in much of Europe after our last bout with national socialism.

Important Discovery

[fyngyrz]

Really I didn't think anyone out of a nursery could be that naive.

I... I... have found a true optimist!

MED?

[fyngyrz]

Mutual Economic Destruction

Uhm.... not taking sides on the original point, but I am curious: Do you really believe that a country as resource-rich as the USA could not do well with brick-wall trade barriers? That seems absurdly naive to me. Sure, it would take a good bit of restructuring, but economic destruction? Hardly.

Re:MED?

[Schmorgluck]

There's more to an economy than material resources. Look at Africa for an example.

Actually, I think the EU might fare better than the USA in such a scenario, by virtue of not treating (any more) every ally it has as subservient.

Re:Add all Europeans to the Do Not Fly List and De

[fyngyrz]

Why do you want to ruin the economy of the United States?

Yes, I want to "ruin" it. By hiring qualified US citizens instead of cheaper, green-carded imports. Indeed I do. I suspect the "ruined" result would be a far stronger economy.

MS-resident spyware

[fyngyrz]

There is no keystroke logger in Windows 10.

Haven't connected your Windows machine to the Internet yet, I see.

Re:if ( NWO = OWG ) squash( dissent );

[EvilAlphonso]

Then again, PRISM is what the Usenet conspiracy theorists were talking about in the 90s as well... I'm not sure if it is behind schedule or if we only found out a tiny part of what has been happening pretty much since day 1 of the internet.

Re:They will be a muslem country in a few years.

[Stephan Schulz]

Who knows. But a few or even a few hundred idiots are not a substantial threat to Europe. CNN just published this graph, showing that the risk for Americans to be killed by firearm in the US is more than two orders of magnitude greater than the risk of an American being killed by terrorism (home or abroad). And if you exclude 9/11, it's more than three orders of magnitude. If the US can survive the NRA, then Europe can survive a couple of other fanatics.

Re:Add all Europeans to the Do Not Fly List and De

[cbhacking]

You're flat-out wrong. but go on "suspecting" that. Out here in the real world, actual economists have done quite a few studies on the impact immigration has on the US economy, and it's tremendously positive. Each immigrant produces, on average, more than one new job, so the net effect is positive. It's not instantaneous - there's always a delay as the market adjusts to the increased labor supply - but the effect is reliable.

In fact, economists believe that open borders would double the size of the US economy in twenty years compared to what it would be under current policies. The problem is that a lot of people who are already in the US would find themselves needing to actually *compete* for jobs. The short-term disruption would suck, especially for those who have been living at or beyond their means on the expectation that they'll always make more money next year than this year instead of living modestly and saving up. Those people, and especially their children, would still have a better life in the end... but short-term thinking is the S.O.P. in this country.

Re:They will be a muslem country in a few years.

[cbhacking]

It would be interesting to see what that graph looks like if you include the USA's response to the September 11 attacks. As in, we got an awful lot of our own people killed trying to "spread freedom" in the Middle East, in response to an attack that killed about as many people as die in car crashes every day.

Re: Add all Europeans to the Do Not Fly List and D

[MenThal]

Independence, eh? From, like, taxation without representation?

Re:if ( NWO = OWG ) squash( dissent );

[Eunuchswear]

I know, don't reply to an AC but... what part of the Pacific ocean do you think Europe borders?

French Polynesia, New Caledonia, Wallis and Futuna and Clipperton Island.

Want to know what bits of the EU are in North America? South America? The Indian Ocean?