Facebook takes upright circulation in opposition to Irish privacy watchdog
Facebook’s upright circulation in opposition to the Knowledge Protection Commission will strive to withhold the corporate’s capacity to switch European voters’ files to the US despite its decrease privacy protections
Sebastian Klovig Skelton ,
Printed: 11 Sep 2020 17: 15
Facebook is looking out for a judicial review in opposition to the Irish Knowledge Protection Commission (DPC) after receiving a preliminary expose from the privacy watchdog to suspend its files transfers to the US.
The social media big lodged the papers ex parte in the Irish Excessive Court docket on 10 September, which is able to now be requested to study the validity and legality of the DPC’s preliminary ruling that Fashioned Contractual Clauses (SCCs) can’t be outmoded as the mechanism for transatlantic files transfers.
The European Court docket of Justice (ECJ) brought the legality of SCCs into quiz of when it dominated to strike down the Privateness Protect agreement in July, on the premise that it didn’t make obvious European voters ample moral of redress when files is gentle by US intelligence companies.
Even supposing the ECJ chanced on SCCs had been peaceable legally reliable, it dominated that companies delight in a accountability to make obvious these they shared the suggestions with granted privacy protections the same to those contained in EU legislation.
Austrian attorney Max Schrems, who initiated the upright proceedings that led to the ECJ’s landmark possibility (colloquially identified as Schrems II), tweeted that Facebook’s possibility to hunt a judicial review “reveals (a) how they’re going to exhaust every alternative to dam a case, even sooner than there may per chance be a possibility, and (b) how it is some distance wholly illusionary to salvage this form of case through in a few weeks or months in the Irish upright gadget”.
Both NOYB and Facebook had been approached for commentary nevertheless didn’t answer by the time of newsletter.
When approached about Facebook’s possibility to hunt a judicial review, the DPC advised Computer Weekly it would no longer be commenting at the present.
Extra upright circulation in opposition to the DPC
In response to Schrems, his digital rights no longer-for-revenue NOYB used to be no longer knowledgeable of the DPC’s possibility to declare the preliminary expose, which has now successfully paused the map of an ongoing criticism he acknowledged the regulator has already didn’t act on for seven years.
For this motive, NOYB has knowledgeable the DPC of its plans to file an interlocutory injunction for its “mismanagement” of the Facebook case.
“This restricted case by the DPC is extremely attention-grabbing, as Facebook has indicated in a letter from 19 August 2020 that (after the end of Safe Harbor, Privateness Protect and the SCCs) it is some distance now relying on a fourth upright foundation for files transfers: the alleged ‘necessity’ to outsource processing to the US below the contract with its users,” it acknowledged.
“This plot that any ‘preliminary expose’ or ‘second investigation’ by the DPC on the SCCs alone will, no doubt, no longer quit Facebook from arguing that its EU-US files transfers continue to be upright. In practice Article 49 (1b), GDPR will be an acceptable upright foundation for terribly restricted files transfers (as an illustration, when an EU user is sending a message to a US user), nevertheless can’t be outmoded to outsource all files processing to the US,” acknowledged Schrems.
“We can therefore take the staunch upright circulation in Ireland to make obvious the rights of users are fully upheld – no matter which upright foundation Facebook claims. After seven years, all playing cards may per chance well perhaps moreover merely peaceable be positioned on the table.”
In response to an FAQ on the Schrems II judgment released by the European Knowledge Protection Board (EDPB) on 23 July 2020, whether or no longer an organization can switch essentially based entirely entirely on SCCs will rely on the results of their assessments, which must shield in mind the conditions of the switch and any supplementary measures that chilly be put in issue.
“The supplementary measures along with SCCs, following a case-by-case diagnosis of the conditions surrounding the switch, would must make obvious US legislation does no longer impinge on the ample stage of protection they guarantee,” it acknowledged.
“Whenever you happen to attain to the conclusion that, taking into memoir the conditions of the switch and which that you just would be able to moreover imagine supplementary measures, acceptable safeguards would no longer be ensured, you are required to suspend or end the switch of non-public files. On the other hand, whenever you are desiring to shield transferring files despite this conclusion, it is most practical to direct your competent supervisory authority.”
It added that, with regard to the necessity of transfers for the efficiency of a contract, companies may per chance well perhaps moreover merely peaceable endure in mind that non-public files can handiest be transferred when it’s executed so ‘as soon as in some time’.
It can per chance may per chance well perhaps moreover merely peaceable be established on a case-by-case foundation whether files transfers would be obvious as “occasional” or “non-occasional”, it acknowledged.
“In spite of all the pieces, this derogation [of GDPR’s Article 49] can handiest be relied upon when the switch is objectively mandatory for the efficiency of the contract.”
Drawl material Continues Beneath
Read more on Social media technology
Irish privacy watchdog orders Facebook to quit sending user files to the US
By: Sebastian Klovig Skelton
Why files exports from the EU will be tough without Privateness Protect
By: Andrew Hartshorn
Schrems steps up stress on Irish files protection commissioner on Facebook’s files sharing with US
By: Bill Goodwin
Privateness Protect: Companies face unusual hurdles to legally switch files to the US
By: Bill Goodwin