
Germany Hardens Line on U.S. Data Transfers - T-A
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2015/10/29/germany-hardens-line-on-u-s-data-transfers/
======
akie
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.

~~~
merb
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

~~~
junto
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.

~~~
dalke
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.)

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

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

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

------
Kequc
> 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.

------
_Codemonkeyism
\-- 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...](http://www.datenschutz-
berlin.de/attachments/1150/Positionspapier_DSK.pdf?1445863040) )

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.

------
joesmo
"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?

~~~
happyscrappy
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.

------
pnathan
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.

------
kazinator
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.

~~~
matt4077
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.

