Adopting cloud computing can mean entrusting data to a third-party vendor. For agencies responsible for personally identifiable information or mission-critical applications, this raises a host of privacy concerns, chief among them the issue of data sovereignty and the question of determining appropriate government and commercial uses of private citizens’ data. This section of the SafeGov.org site analyzes the risks to privacy associated with cloud adoption and explores ongoing means to mitigate them.
Cerys Wyn Davies, Out-Law.com, Monday, July 25, 2016
US businesses intending to sign up to the new EU-US Privacy Shield within the first two months of it becoming operational can do so without first having to update arrangements for sharing data with others. However, they will only have a limited time in which to put new contracts in place.
Law Office of Bradley S. Shear
Friday, July 22, 2016
The unanimous 3-0 ruling is a victory for not only personal privacy rights but also for the theory that people’s rights in the physical world should be extended to the digital world. This decision will have a tremendous impact on international technology service providers, social media platforms, apps, law enforcement, and individual users of mobile and cloud-based services.
Justin Antonipillai and Ted Dean, Wednesday, July 20, 2016
Privacy Shield, as you may know, will guide how US and EU companies will protect the privacy of personal data of EU individuals that gets transmitted to our nation, and speed digital commerce across the Atlantic. Commerce has the lead on the US side to carry out the framework, working with other US agencies and our EU counterparts. For more details, see the Privacy Shield materials – Secretary Pritzker’s remarks, fact sheet and FAQs, and a guide for companies to sign up – posted July 12 on Commerce.gov. Also see our testimony to the European Commission on March 17, and my (Justin) speech to the TRUSTe Privacy Risk conference on June 8 in San Francisco.
Tuesday, July 19, 2016
To the surprise of many, Microsoft has just won a historic court case defeating efforts by the U.S. government to seize private data held by the firm’s customers overseas. According to a U.S. Appeals Court ruling, Federal prosecutors cannot use search warrants to grab the content of email messages from data centers located outside the United States, even when these facilities are owned and operated by a U.S. cloud provider such as Microsoft.
Many Americans may not understand why this decision is relevant to their daily lives: The federal government asserted tech companies own individuals’ personal information such as emails and photographs, and not the individuals themselves. This would give your personal information less privacy protection than the family notes you place in your dresser drawer at home. Multiple branches of government have important responsibilities in remedying this problem. The Court of Appeals has acted. Now, it’s time for Congress to modernize an outdated law.
Mitrano & Associates
Sunday, July 17, 2016
Mark the Second Circuit decision in the Microsoft case as a turning point. The win for Microsoft is a victory for U.S. innovation, manufacturing and Internet companies, privacy advocates, and legal due process. The Court held that the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (“ECPA,” and specifically in this case, Title II, Stored Communications) does not extend beyond the United States and its territories. Its reasoning does yet more.
Friday, July 15, 2016
Yesterday, Microsoft won a huge case against government surveillance, a case with very important implications: In the Matter of a Warrant to Search a Certain E‐Mail Account Controlled and Maintained by Microsoft Corporation. Why does it matter how the government seeks to obtain data stored abroad? It matters because the US government was seeking to use to obtain data stored in Ireland in a way that would violate Irish law. Had the government used the MLAT process, the government would have had to seek the information by going to a judge in Ireland. Although the MLAT process is clunkier and more difficult than just using ECPA, following the MLAT process is important to avoid at least three very troubling consequences.
Privacy Shield Marks a Promising Step Forward – Not the End of the Road – on Privacy posted by Chris Hopfensperger in Privacy
Chris Hopfensperger, BSA TechPost, Thursday, July 14, 2016
Looking ahead, though, much more remains to be done. As a start, international policymakers need to create a durable framework to govern the new age of data-related investigations, and Members of Congress must continue to rebuild trust among technology users by improving the US privacy regime.
Martin Braun, Reed Freeman Barry Hurewitz, Benjamin Powell and Heather Zachary, Mondaq, Wednesday, July 13, 2016
The European Commission formally adopted the EU-US Privacy Shield on Tuesday, ending months of legal uncertainty with a new framework for governing transatlantic data transfers after the Privacy Safe Harbor framework was invalidated in 2015. According to the Commission, Privacy Shield shifts from being a system based on self-regulation to "an oversight system that is more responsive as well as proactive" via stronger efforts by the US Department of Commerce, the US Federal Trade Commission and European Data Protection Authorities. The US Department of Commerce is now encouraging companies to review the framework, and it will begin accepting voluntary certifications beginning on August 1.
Stephanie Bodoni, Bloomberg, Tuesday, July 12, 2016
“The EU-U.S. Privacy Shield is a robust new system to protect the personal data of Europeans and ensure legal certainty for businesses,” EU Justice Commissioner Vera Jourova said in a statement on Tuesday, the first day of the new pact. “It brings stronger data protection standards that are better enforced, safeguards on government access, and easier redress for individuals in case of complaints.”