Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Court Adviser Deals Major Blow to EU-U.S. Data Sharing Deal

Revelations of NSA spying threaten Safe Harbor agreement.

jokerpro / Shutterstock

A deal easing the transfer of data between the United States and the EU is invalid, an adviser to the European Union’s top court said on Wednesday, dealing a blow to a system used by Facebook, Google and thousands of other companies.

The Safe Harbor agreement did not do enough to protect EU citizen’s private information when it reached the United States and should have been suspended, Yves Bot, advocate general at the European Court of Justice (ECJ), said.

While Bot’s opinions are not binding, they tend to be followed by the court’s judges, who are considering a complaint about the system in the wake of revelations from ex-National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden of mass U.S. government surveillance.

In a trenchant legal opinion which will do little to heal frayed transatlantic relations following the spying leaks, Bot also said national data protection authorities could suspend data transfers to third countries if they felt EU citizens’ privacy was compromised.

That would cause a headache for U.S. companies operating in the EU as well as open up the risk of a patchwork of national approaches, lawyers said.

Many companies, particularly tech companies, have hailed the 2000 Safe Harbor deal, saying it helps them get around cumbersome checks to transfer vital data, including payroll and human resources information as well as online advertising worth billions of dollars, between offices on both sides of the Atlantic.

“We are concerned about the potential disruption to international data flows if the court follows today’s opinion,” said John Higgins, director general of DigitalEurope, whose members include Apple, Cisco, Ericsson and Google.

Lawyers said a negative ruling from the court would have an impact on all data transfers between the EU and the United States, not just those conducted through Safe Harbor.

“If you question overall the validity of U.S. law, then what about these other legal mechanisms?” said Wim Nauwelaerts, partner at law firm Hunton & Williams.

That could lead to calls from privacy advocates for more data centers in Europe, something the industry has long resisted on the grounds that it constitutes protectionism.

Some European companies, however, such as Germany’s Deutsche Telekom, have said they would route all email traffic through domestic servers to avoid U.S. snooping.

The case stems from a complaint filed by 27-year-old Austrian law student Max Schrems against Facebook, alleging the company was helping the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) harvest email and other private data by forwarding European customer’s data to servers in the United States.

Facebook rejects the claim that it provided the NSA with “backdoor” access to its servers and said it would wait for the full judgment, a spokeswoman said on Wednesday.

The Irish Data Protection Commissioner, who watches over major tech companies’ compliance with privacy laws since they are headquartered in Ireland, rejected the complaint, saying such transfers were allowed under the Safe Harbor framework.

But the case was referred to the European Court of Justice after Schrems appealed.

“It is apparent from the findings of the High Court of Ireland and of the (European) Commission itself that the law and practice of the United States allow the large-scale collection of the personal data of citizens of the EU which is transferred, without those citizens benefiting from effective judicial protection,” Bot said.

The United States and the commission have been in talks for two years to strengthen the Safe Harbor framework amid calls for its suspension.

Herwig Hofmann, a lawyer for Max Schrems, said he was “delighted” about the advocate general’s opinion.

“If the United States doesn’t change its laws in order to guarantee a minimum of data protection to European citizens, U.S. companies will have to process their data in the EU,” he told reporters at the court in Luxembourg.

(Additional reporting by Pia Oppel in Luxembourg; Editing by Andrew Heavens and David Evans)

This article originally appeared on Recode.net.

See More:

More in Technology

Podcasts
Are humanoid robots all hype?Are humanoid robots all hype?
Podcast
Podcasts

AI is making them better — but they’re not going to be doing your chores anytime soon.

By Avishay Artsy and Sean Rameswaram
Future Perfect
The old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemicThe old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemic
Future Perfect

Glycol vapors, explained.

By Shayna Korol
Future Perfect
Elon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wantsElon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wants
Future Perfect

It’s not about who wins. It’s about the dirty laundry you air along the way.

By Sara Herschander
Life
Why banning kids from AI isn’t the answerWhy banning kids from AI isn’t the answer
Life

What kids really need in the age of artificial intelligence.

By Anna North
Culture
Anthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque messAnthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque mess
Culture

“Your AI monster ate all our work. Now you’re trying to pay us off with this piece of garbage that doesn’t work.”

By Constance Grady
Future Perfect
Some deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapySome deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapy
Future Perfect

A medical field that almost died is quietly fixing one disease at a time.

By Bryan Walsh