Search
Content type: News & Analysis
7 July 2016
It has been said is that we pay for free services with our personal data. Now, the Privacy Shield exponentially expands this truth and we are paying for the cost of U.S. political dysfunction combined with EU complacency with our privacy. More than four months after the first EU-US Privacy Shield was published on 29 February 2016, a new version has been leaked. Remarkably, it is expected to be adopted.
Four months, two opinions by group of EU data protection…
Content type: Advocacy
Privacy International has responded to the European Commission’s consultation on the interoperability of EU information systems for borders and security.
The Commission is currently looking at ways in which various border control and policing EU databases and IT systems can be connected to share and exchange more data.
The plans raise a number of concerns as highlighted by Privacy International in our response. These relate to significant potential harms associated with…
Content type: Press release
The committee of data protection regulators across Europe, the Working Party 29, announced today its opinion on the current “Privacy Shield”. The Opinion is expected shortly, and based on the statements made by the Working Party chair in a press conference, we understand that the Working Party, while noting improvements from the annulled “Safe Harbor” agreement, has serious concerns about a range of aspects of the current "Privacy Shield" agreement with the U.S.
Overall they note the…
Content type: News & Analysis
Should the European Union agree to legitimise trade with a country that refuses to adhere to European legal standards? This is the fundamental question that will be addressed at tomorrow’s meeting among European privacy regulators when they publish their opinion on the data-sharing agreement known as the ‘Privacy Shield’, the replacement to the failed ‘Safe Harbour’ agreement.
Background
Many of the world’s largest companies, such as Google and Facebook, store their customers’ data in…
Content type: News & Analysis
PI's full analysis can be read here
On 29 February 2016, the European Commission and the US government released the details of the proposed EU-U.S. “Privacy Shield”. The “Privacy Shield” replaces the now defunct so-called “Safe Harbor”.
The Privacy Shield is in fact a significant number of documents from various parts of the U.S. administration, which merely outline the existing, weak U.S. safeguards applicable to personal data of EU citizens. These documents are…
Content type: Advocacy
Introduction
On 29 February 2016, the European Commission and the US government released the details of the proposed EU-U.S. “Privacy Shield”. The “Privacy Shield” replaces the now defunct so-called “Safe Harbor”.
The Privacy Shield is in fact a significant number of documents from various parts of the U.S. administration, which merely outline the existing, weak U.S. safeguards applicable to personal data of EU citizens. These documents are meant to serve as the basis for an “adequacy”…
Content type: News & Analysis
The major overhaul of data protection laws in Europe is finally over, after three years of arduous and sustained political and lobbying activity by all those with a major stake and interest, including us at Privacy International (See our initial analysis of the two laws in 2012). We welcome this long overdue closure, but is this 91-articled, 200-paged piece of legislation been worth the enormous effort and no doubt millions of euros, dollars and pounds spent on it?
The legislative package…
Content type: News & Analysis
We, and other privacy advocates, havecriticised the poor provisions of the so-called Safe Harbour agreement, which allows free transfers of personal information from European countries to companies in the United States that have signed up and promise to abide by its Principles. Now the European Commission, prompted by the recent mass surveillance scandals, has published an investigation into this agreement which provides overwhelming evidence that it is not fit for purpose. It…
Content type: News & Analysis
The European Parliament Committee that deals with civil liberties and justice issues will have a first vote this week on the revised European data protection framework after months and months of deliberations and negotiations over more than 4,000 amendments. The vote is the first on the framework, which will decide the future of privacy and data protection in Europe. The recent revelations surrounding government surveillance involving some of the Internet's biggest companies have highlighted…
Content type: Press release
Google's latest Transparency Report, released at 3pm GMT this afternoon, shows that requests by European governments for the browsing history, email communications, documents and IP addresses of Google's users have skyrocketed since the Transparency Report was launched three years ago. Countries in the European Union made 7,254 requests about 9,240 users or accounts between July and December 2012, averaging over 1,200 requests a month. This represents over a third of all requests made by…
Content type: News & Analysis
Privacy International welcomes the Select Committee Inquiry. We approach the proposed EU Data Protection Framework from the perspective of individual citizens and consumers.
We consider that this Inquiry and other consultations must take into account not just considerations of burdens to business and administrations, but also the fundamental rights of individuals to privacy and data protection that the UK has to comply with as a signatory to EU treaties and conventions.
The…
Content type: Report
Following on from their 2009 discussion paper, in 2010 the European Commission published a Communication on changes to the 1995 European Union Directive on data protection. The European Union’s 1995 Directive on data protection is a leading regional instrument for privacy and is often the model for other countries across the globe. The Directive has been integral to pushing back against key surveillance and tracking initiaitives by governments and industry.
In this report we respond to that…