4 ms·

>If you're a US entity you can freely store EU data on US servers entirely without EU permission or consent, and do anything with it that you want to (within US

>If you're a US entity you can freely store EU data on US servers entirely without EU permission or consent, and do anything with it that you want to (within US law), so long as you don't operate within the EU. No, this was what was invalidated; Privacy Shield enabled this behavior >The EU-U.S. and Swiss-U.S. Privacy Shield Frameworks were designed by the U.S. Department of Commerce and the European Commission and Swiss Administration to provide companies on both sides of the Atlantic with a mechanism to comply with data protection requirements when transferring personal data from the European Union and Switzerland to the United States in support of transatlantic commerce. [1] With Privacy Shield being invalidated, and nothing else to currently take its place, EU data will technically have to sit within EU (as I understand it). Enforcement of this law will take sometime and won't impact a little startup that's breaking all sorts of rules, as you won't have enough valuable assets for a legal team to go after. If you are a large multi-national corporation though this is trouble..especially if you aren't using informed consent to notify EU users on what's happening with their data. >Despite the invalidations made by the judgment, absolutely "necessary" data flows can continue to flow under Article 49 of the GDPR. Any situation where users want their data to flow abroad is still legal, as this can be based on the informed consent of the user, which can be withdrawn at any time. Equally the law allows data flows for what is "necessary" to fulfil a contract. [2] [1] https://www.privacyshield.gov/welcome https://www.privacyshield.gov/welcome [2] https://noyb.eu/en/cjeu https://noyb.eu/en/cjeu

thu2111 6y ago
No, this was what was invalidated I think you missed the point. They're arguing they don't care what the EU thinks. If some EU court invalidates some EU specific thing they didn't care about previously, they still don't care about it afterwards. Enforcement of this law will take sometime Like, forever? How many US firms has the EU taken to court in the USA and won, over their cookie law? EU cannot enforce these laws on US firms, only EU firms, but even then, such things are basically never actually enforced except for political reasons. So they might try and cause trouble to Google and Facebook or Apple, because they're big sources of money. Everyone else will just ignore it or go through some compliance motions if they feel like it. As always with the EU there are regulations everywhere and they don't mean anything. As you state yourself, "necessary" data can continue to move. This is the same as saying "we'll make it up as we go along".

thu2111 6y ago

No, this was what was invalidated I think you missed the point. They're arguing they don't care what the EU thinks. If some EU court invalidates some EU specific thing they didn't care about previously, they still don't care about it afterwards. Enforcement of this law will take sometime Like, forever? How many US firms has the EU taken to court in the USA and won, over their cookie law? EU cannot enforce these laws on US firms, only EU firms, but even then, such things are basically never actually enforced except for political reasons. So they might try and cause trouble to Google and Facebook or Apple, because they're big sources of money. Everyone else will just ignore it or go through some compliance motions if they feel like it. As always with the EU there are regulations everywhere and they don't mean anything. As you state yourself, "necessary" data can continue to move. This is the same as saying "we'll make it up as we go along".