On October 29, 2024, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) published its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“NPRM”) to implement President Biden’s Executive Order 14117, “Preventing Access to Americans’ Bulk Sensitive Personal Data and United States Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern.” This follows the DOJ’s publication of its Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking earlier this year.
On April 24, President Biden signed a sweeping foreign aid bill into law, which included a critical provision covering privacy and data transfers known as the Protecting Americans’ Data from Foreign Adversaries Act (“PADFA”). This Act is separate from the TikTok divestment portion of the legislation, which has received far greater attention in the press.
On September 28, 2023, the Cyberspace Administration of China (“CAC”) issued a Draft Rule on the Regulation and Facilitation of Cross-Border Transfer of Personal Information (the “Draft Rule”). The Draft Rule seeks to streamline the security requirements pertaining to cross-border transfer of personal information under certain circumstances. The Draft Rule is open for comments from the public until October 15, 2023.Continue Reading China Proposes to Ease Oversight of Cross-Border Transfer of Personal Information
A recent decision by the Austrian Supervisory Authority (“SA”) casts a spotlight on the complexities of data transfers and cookie use, and highlights a shift in regulatory focus onto these topics in the year ahead. Regulators around Europe are increasingly beginning to weigh in on such transfers, and the outcomes of their deliberations will shape the data transfer compliance landscape in the months to come. These decisions present complex questions about the future of data transfers in the EU and UK.
Continue Reading Increased EU Scrutiny of US Data Transfers Through Cookie Use
On December 15, 2021, Australia and the United States signed an agreement that will make it more efficient for law enforcement agencies in both countries to obtain data about criminal suspects, but it leaves technology companies with concerning questions. The new agreement was forged under the Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data (CLOUD) Act, a 2018 statute that enables law enforcement to more easily secure important electronic information about suspected crimes—including terrorism, violent crimes, sexual exploitation of children, and cybercrimes like ransomware or attacks on critical infrastructure—from global technology companies based in the United States. Although the agreement was designed to facilitate law enforcement investigations, it leaves unanswered the encryption privacy questions that have beset preceding agreements.
Continue Reading United States-Australia CLOUD Act Agreement Leaves Encryption Uncertainties
2021 was a busy year for data protection law in China. On June 10, 2021, the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China adopted the Data Security Law (DSL), which went into effect on September 1, 2021. On August 20, 2021, the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress enacted the Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL), which went into effect just last month, in November 2021. The DSL applies broadly to processing of all data, not just personal information or electronic data and expands on the provisions from China’s Cybersecurity Law, which was enacted in 2016. In contrast, the PIPL applies only to the processing of personal information and has been compared to Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), although that comparison may obscure the contours of China’s law more than it enlightens.
Consistent with the course of Chinese administrative law, the laws’ key terms, analyses, and processes will continue to be fleshed out and perhaps materially enhanced or diminished in a series of regulations, measures, standards, and guidance documents. The latest draft measures on cross-border transfers, which are being closely watched by organizations contemplating cross border data transfers, were published at the end of October, and comments were accepted through November. We expect China to continue finalizing the laws’ terms and measures in 2022.Continue Reading What China’s New Data Laws Could Mean for 2022
The Courts of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) held in its July 2020 Schrems II decision that, in order for entities in other countries to import personal data from the European Economic Area (EEA), the importer must be able to provide data protections ‘essentially equivalent’ to those the EEA offers under its General Data Protection Regulation. The CJEU expressed particular concern that United States’ national security intelligence gathering laws prevent U.S.-based entities from providing such protections. This decision has sharply limited the sharing of clinical research data from the EEA to the United States. After describing the pertinent aspects of the Schrems II decision, this article evaluates U.S. national security intelligence gathering frameworks, including Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and Executive Order 12333. The article then leverages recent draft guidance from the European Data Protection Board to explain how entities may be able to adopt widely used contractual and technical measures, such as data pseudonymization, to provide ‘essentially equivalent’ protections in the clinical research context.
Continue Reading Demystifying Schrems II for the Cross-Border Transfer of Clinical Research Data
As we stand at the beginning of 2021 and a new presidential administration, we look back on the year behind us. Hindsight is always 2020, and 2020 may be best viewed in hindsight. We saw rapid changes in the privacy space, prompted in part by the global COVID-19 response. Infrastructure and services across multiple sectors continue to rely on data and digital platforms to function. Five prominent developments shaped the data privacy environment in 2020.
Continue Reading Privacy Year in Review: 2020’s Hottest Topics
The Opinion of Advocate-General (AG) Henrik Saugmandsgaardøe in the “Schrems II” case (C-311-18) was delivered on 19 December and will likely leave organisations, which currently rely on EC Commission-approved standard contractual clauses to ensure adequate protection for personal data that they transfer internationally heaving a collective sigh of relief, at least for the moment.
Continue Reading Schrems II and Standard Contractual Clauses – the Advocate-General’s Opinion