Germany Hardens Line on U.S. Data Transfers | Hacker News Reader

Germany Hardens Line on U.S. Data Transfers

blogs.wsj.com

63 pointsT-A19 comments

Love how they use sentences like "Germans are particularly sensitive to electronic surveillance" and "(their) hard line on data transfers has drawn the ire of" to make it sound as if the Germans are the unreasonable ones here.

me, too. I think that we (Germany) are as bad as others (U.S.), however we do so, as we are angels, but we definitely aren't. I also think that the german government is way more corrupt and broke some surveillance rules as well as the us did

There is also a perceived threat of a threat as well though. This is how I imagine the conversation:

  NSA: We need your data feeds in order to protect you 
       using our super-duper 'big data' intel tools. Install
       these black boxes and we'll tell you when you are 
       under imminent threat.

  BND: Um, not sure about this. Not sure it might be
       illegal?

  NSA: You wouldn't want a terrorist attack like the one in 
       Madrid, or London on German soil would you?

  BND: Sigh, give us the black boxes then.

  NSA: Oh oops slight porky... they are already installed. We 
       just needed your permission.

You imagine NSA would use British slang? ;) (I had to look up what 'porky' meant in this context. Apparently 'very big lie', and perhaps rhyming slang for porky pie => lie.)

One of the problems of being British (a crime I suspect the GP of) is you don't always know what is British slang

Perhaps next our intrepid NSA agent will pull a cooldrink from the cubbyhole when the bakkie stops at the robot.

That's South African slang in case anyone's wondering.

Yeah, that supposed NSA guy is even inexplicably using single quotes.

Yes, and it's also interesting that the "ire" they've drawn is from the Director General of Digital Europe, a business association made up of dozens of large companies including Apple, Google, Microsoft and Oracle. Might be a conflict of interest there (understatement).

> The court ruled that Europeans’ data was insufficiently protected when transferred to the U.S., where it could be accessed by national intelligence services.

This is the key part and I don't think it's even entirely wrong. There's a bit of a different perspective over here about data and the only people complaining seem to be those who have certain financial interest.

The same complaints or worse could be made about Europe's high import tax. Which encourages large companies to move within EU borders.

Ultimately that's the only thing that will happen as a result of this. The EU's tech infrastructure will grow and almost entirely at the cost of large companies. Side effect being that European data servers will gain a certain level of independence.

-- IANAL --

The relevant paragraph of the position paper might be:

"Die Datenschutzbehörden werden derzeit keine neuen Genehmigungen für Datenübermittlungen in die USA auf Grundlage von verbindlichen Unternehmensregelungen (BCR) oder Datenexportverträgen erteilen."

( http://www.datenschutz-berlin.de/attachments/1150/Positionsp... )

which says data protection agencies in Germany will not permit new Binding Corporate Rules (BCR) or new (!) data export contracts ("Datenexportverträgen") anymore.

Sadly (gladly?) they do not use the word "Standardvertragsklauseln" for model EU clauses here, so it's not clear if you could get new approval for model standard clauses. They probably do not mean "Standardvertragsklauseln" as they mention "Standardvertragsklauseln" when agreeing to the end of January deadline.

Also reading the text overall I assume that existing BCR etc. are fine until the end of January as by the EU 29 Working Party paper, just no new ones.

"Germany’s hard line on the transfer of its citizens’ personal data to the U.S. has come in for criticism from an influential European association of global digital businesses, which argues that severely limiting such transfers would cause market volatility."

I assume he means market volatility in the US, of course, as in the EU it's likely to increase business to EU companies. I hope it does cause market volatility and businesses in the US to go out of business as that is what they deserve, mostly through no fault of their own (mostly because some of the big tech companies actively support the legislation that led to this). Maybe at that point our government will finally start to listen to its people, or more accurately, the only thing they ever listen to: money. In fact, the more businesses that close and the more businesses that lose opportunities because of our anti-privacy, anti-security laws, the better.

What other kind of response could you possibly have towards a country that has unlimited, unfettered access to ALL its businesses' data without needing any legal resource or process to get it?

EU tech companies certainly need all the help they can get and that angle makes more sense than pretending that the NSA won't get the data, hell EU governments will hand it to them as they work so closely on intel.

At present, I am kind of looking at Germany for best-in-breed data privacy and surveillance protection culture and frankly, I am glad that Germany is standing up for this.

The cynic in me tells me that, of course, they are not protecting their citizens, only seeking to eliminate competition in who has power over them.

This was the result of a judgement by the highest European Court. The executive was actually opposed to striking down safe harbour.

I might be living in a fantasy world, but I believe the courts to be amongst the most independent and trustworthy institutions. Any connection between the (highest!) court and the security apparatus or even political leadership would, if revealed, trigger a constitutional crisis of unheard proportions.

I also don't see what motives these judges would have. Too lazy too look it up for the European courts, but most judges are either appointed for life, appointed for a single term with no possibility of a second term or just incredibly hard to fire. They're also well paid and have usually demonstrated their resistance to the appeal of money by being the best at what they do (at least in Germany, judges are recruited only from the top 5% of law graduates) and not choosing to work at a major law firm with a pay check that's easily 5-10x what a judge earns.

Sure, maybe they're blackmailed or something like that, but (a) the judges I know lead incredibly boring private lives so it'd be hard to find dirt on a majority of the panel, (b) I'd expect at least one them to gladly fall on her sword and reveal any such plot (based on my possibly rose-coloured impression of their character). Also remember that some (legal) sex story, affair or former marijuana use wouldn't really be a scandal in Europe. You'd need some actual criminal activity.

tl/dr nah, this is no conspiracy.

Yes, for once, business, economic and political incentives line up quite well. I don't mind it. I would like to see a more decentralized internet anyway.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com