""It's worth remembering that both Safe Harbour and Privacy Shield fell under legal challenge on similar grounds, and campaigners have already signaled that further appeals are likely. That means the framework may not be the last word in EU-US data transfers," he said. Does an agreement with the US make that much difference? Without this agreement, EU companies would have to draft complex contracts with US suppliers imposing restrictions on data processing and handling. Requiring"
"agreements for each transfer, this would be expensive and time consuming, assuming it even met watertight legal standards under real-world conditions. Companies would love to move on from this confusing situation, yet it might still be too soon to celebrate the ruling. Max Schrems, the lawyer who lodged the initial complaint, still campaigns on the issue through an NGO he founded, None of Your Business (NOYB). He believed the Court's ruling was still open to appeal."
Both Safe Harbour and Privacy Shield faced legal challenge on similar grounds, and campaigners signaled further appeals likely, leaving the EU-US transfer framework legally uncertain. Without a bilateral agreement, EU companies would need to draft detailed contracts with US suppliers imposing restrictions on data processing and handling. Requiring agreements for each transfer would be expensive and time consuming and might still fail to meet watertight legal standards in practice. Businesses seek clarity to move on from the confusing situation, but continued campaigning by Max Schrems through NGO None of Your Business (NOYB) leaves the Court's ruling potentially open to appeal.
Read at CSO Online
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]