Posted in Global Interoperability

Opinion

Getting Practical and Thinking Ahead: “Interoperability” Is Gaining Momentum

In a world of disparate privacy regimes, pragmatic privacy professionals, experts and regulators have in recent years championed “interoperability” as the way forward for providing consistent privacy protections for global data flows. Of course, many in the privacy and data protection community continue to pursue the ideal of a global privacy standard and have made various recommendations to that effect over the years. Witness the recent “Resolution on anchoring data protection and the protection of privacy in international law” adopted by the International Conference of Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners in Warsaw, Poland, last September.

More from Markus Heyder

EU Data Protection

An Honest Recap on Safe Harbor

By Eduardo Ustaran, CIPP/E

The recent vote at the European Parliament—by an overwhelming majority of 544 to 78 members, with 60 abstentions—calling for the immediate suspension of Safe Harbor has sent some powerful shockwaves across the business and legal communities in the EU and beyond. This should not have come as a surprise, given that the European Parliament has been very vocal in this respect for a while, but it is still a chilling reminder of the uncertainty surrounding the scheme—possibly the most widely relied upon mechanism to legitimise data flows between the EU and the U.S.

The big question that remains on the ground is whether EU-based organisations that rely on Safe Harbor as the legal basis for transferring data to either their own corporate group entities or service providers operating in the U.S. are doing the right thing or should be looking for alternatives.

More from Eduardo Ustaran

EU Data Protection

My Dinner with Jan

German Green MEP Jan Philipp Albrecht

On Wednesday of last week, in Strasbourg, France, the European Parliament overwhelmingly approved a proposal for a sweeping, region-wide Data Protection Regulation, ratifying the work of MEP Jan Philipp Albrecht, who almost two years ago began his work as rapporteur for the regulation.

The next evening, on Thursday in Palo Alto, California, I was sitting across the dinner table from Albrecht—who prefers to be called Jan—at an Asian-Fusion restaurant, enjoying a sociable evening for speakers at the next day’s Berkeley Center for Law and Technology (BLCT) annual Silicon Valley Privacy Conference.

More from Christopher Wolf

Opinion

The Global Competition Between Privacy Models

Countries around the world are struggling to decide whether to adopt data protection law based on the proposed EU Data Protection Regulation or to use a U.S. approach to privacy protection. As I observed firsthand during a recent trip to Japan, the result is competition in global data protection policy making, with the European Commission on the one side and the U.S. government on the other side, both lobbying other countries to follow their respective models.

More from Christopher Kuner

Data Transfers

Update: EU and APEC—A Roadmap for Global Interoperability?

By John Kropf, CIPP/US, CIPP/G

In November 2013, Malcolm Crompton, CIPP/US, and I suggested in a short IAPP article for The Privacy Advisor that the challenge for global data flows was interoperability but that there was reason for optimism between the world’s two largest economic entities: the EU and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) (EU and APEC: A Roadmap for Global Interoperability?).

More from John Kropf

Opinion

Shutting Europe Down Is Not the Way To Defend Privacy

By Eduardo Ustaran, CIPP/E

When I was at university, I remember a lecturer who used to say the first rule that any law degree student should follow was “to not panic.” That is a rule that we should all apply when reading the draft report of the LIBE Committee of the European Parliament on the NSA surveillance programme. The prospect of a closed-down Europe that is advocated by the report is certainly daunting. Shutting down pretty much all transatlantic data flows in order to prevent unreasonable access to data by the U.S. intelligence services would not only be disproportionate, but it would be hugely damaging to the information society we all rely on.

More from Eduardo Ustaran

EU-U.S. Relations

The Brussels and Warsaw Privacy Peace Talks

Next month, FTC Commissioner Julie Brill and Danny Sepulveda, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, will travel to Brussels to discuss privacy with EU officials. Later in the month, Poland will host the 35th Conference of Data Protection of Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners, a meeting that will be attended by privacy officials and stakeholders from around the world.  Both gatherings provide an opportunity to declare a cease fire in the war of words—a war in which most of the “incoming” has originated on the European side of the Atlantic in the wake of the Snowden NSA revelations, and a war that threatens progress in international cooperation on privacy.

More from Christopher Wolf

Navigate

It’s About Data Assets, Not Privacy, Or Is It?

By Jedidiah Bracy, CIPP/US, CIPP/E

In his discussion of Universal People Sensors in Portsmouth, NH, earlier this summer, Alex “Sandy” Pentland made the case for the benefits of Big Data. He said it’s not about privacy, it’s about using data as an asset. For Pentland, the question is, “Who controls the data, and can you be secure in sharing it for particular purposes?”

As co-leader of the World Economic Forum Big Data and Personal Data Initiatives and employee at MIT, Pentland presented a slew of examples bolstering the need for collecting vast sets of information in order to track and better learn about our world. (My colleague Emily Leach wrote a great piece on some of Pentland’s work here.) It can help travelers drive more safely, better connect those suffering from mental health issues with others and track infectious diseases.

More from Jedidiah Bracy