Latest in Schrems v. Data Protection Commissioner
Tensions between the U.S. and the EU on Privacy Shield will provide some clues about the future of global privacy legislation.
European hypocrisy on data protection is a lot like the weather. Everyone complains about it but no one does anything about it. Until today.
It’s time for Europe to acknowledge that bulk data collection and privacy are not utterly in conflict, and to find a way out of the thicket in which it is increasingly entangled.
A new report from Sidley Austin provides a roadmap for the comparative analysis of United States and E.U. member state data protections, following Schrems v. Data Protection Commissioner.
U.S. and European Union data-regulators today reached a new legal framework that will govern the transfer of data across the Atlantic.
In the wake of EU decisions concerning the Safe Harbor laws (Schrems) and U.S. Surveillance practices, Peter Swire and the Future of Privacy Forum have released a white paper addressing US privacy law and surveillance reforms.
Reform will require changes to American law in two areas – (1) limiting “generalised” surveillance, and (2) providing expanded redress for foreign citizens.
It's time to return the Schrems favor: A lawsuit in Europe against a European government, alleging that it is violating the rights of Americans through its surveillance using the same rationale laid out in the ECJ decision.
Clapper v. Amnesty International seems to foreclose most challenges to NSA surveillance for lack of Article III standing. However, the right plaintiff would have a better chance at having a claim heard on the merits today than some in the national security community may think.
Want to see cyber attribution and deterrence in action? In August, a hacker pulled the names of US military personnel and others out of a corporate network and passed them to ISIL. British jihadist Junaid Hussain exulted when ISIL released the names, but two weeks after his tweet, Hussain was killed in a US airstrike.