[Atlantis]

It's good to see that the EU is protecting the data of its citizens against American spying.

If US monopolies like FaceBook have to leave Europe and are kicked out of China, we'll have the opportunity to establish competing enterprises that are governed by European and not America law and that have to protect our data.

In the end, we'll all benefit if the US monopolies are destroyed.

But I guess the threat of leaving Europe is just an empty promise. They are not going to leave the most profitable market. We'll have to tighten the screws and make them pay more taxes in Europe.

Facebook says it may quit Europe over ban on sharing data with US

Facebook has warned that it may pull out of Europe if the Irish data protection commissioner enforces a ban on sharing data with the US, after a landmark ruling by the European court of justice found in July that there were insufficient safeguards against snooping by US intelligence agencies.

In a court filing in Dublin, Facebook’s associate general counsel wrote that enforcing the ban would leave the company unable to operate.

“In the event that [Facebook] were subject to a complete suspension of the transfer of users’ data to the US,” Yvonne Cunnane argued, “it is not clear … how, in those circumstances, it could continue to provide the Facebook and Instagram services in the EU.”

Facebook denied the filing was a threat, arguing in a statement that it was a simple reflection of reality. “Facebook is not threatening to withdraw from Europe,” a spokesperson said.

“Legal documents filed with the Irish high court set out the simple reality that Facebook, and many other businesses, organisations and services, rely on data transfers between the EU and the US in order to operate their services. A lack of safe, secure and legal international data transfers would damage the economy and hamper the growth of data-driven businesses in the EU, just as we seek a recovery from Covid-19.”

The filing is the latest volley in a legal battle that has lasted almost a decade. In 2011, Max Schrems, an Austrian lawyer, began filing privacy complaints with the Irish data protection commissioner, which regulates Facebook in the EU, about the social network’s practices.

Those complaints gathered momentum two years later, when the Guardian revealed the NSA’s Prism program, a vast surveillance operation involving direct access to the systems of Google, Facebook, Apple and other US internet companies. Schrems filed a further privacy complaint, which was eventually referred to the European court of justice.

That court found in 2015 that, because of the existence of Prism, the “Safe Harbour” agreement, which allowed US companies to transfer the data of EU citizens back home, was invalid.

The EU then attempted a second legal agreement for the data transfers, a so-called privacy shield; that too was invalidated in July this year, with the court again ruling that the US does not limit surveillance of EU citizens.

In September, the Irish data protection commissioner began the process of enforcing that ruling. The commissioner issued a preliminary order compelling the social network to suspend data transfers overseas.

In response, Nick Clegg, the company’s head of global affairs and communications, published a blogpost that argued that “international data transfers underpin the global economy and support many of the services that are fundamental to our daily lives”.

“In the worst-case scenario, this could mean that a small tech start-up in Germany would no longer be able to use a US-based cloud provider,” he wrote. “A Spanish product development company could no longer be able to run an operation across multiple time zones. A French retailer may find they can no longer maintain a call centre in Morocco.”

Clegg added: “We support global rules that can ensure consistent treatment of data around the world.”

[Politics_Observer]

I don't blame the Europeans in this case. I like to use encrypted email service, Protonmail which is based out of Switzerland and has strong privacy laws. I pay them an annual fee for the service but the money is worth protecting my privacy given I don't want companies like google selling my private information to advertisers. If they can do that, who knows what else they could be doing with your private data.

[Beren]

del

[Politics_Observer]

@Beren

Sounds like if they are going to be doing business in Europe they are going to have come up with a new model. If they want to be within the laws and regulations in Europe, they might have to start charging people for using their service given that they can't make money via adveritising (due to the data sharing constraints).

[Beren]

@Beren

Sounds like if they are going to be doing business in Europe they are going to have come up with a new model. If they want to be within the laws and regulations in Europe, they might have to start charging people for using their service given that they can't make money via adveritising (due to the data sharing constraints).

That would be another great and popular achievement by the EU. I also like how I have to accept cookies.

[Politics_Observer]

@Beren

There is ways around the fact they make you accept cookies. You using Firefox? You can set the settings on your browser to where your cookies are erased every single time you exit out of your browser. Privacy Badger is a great tool to use to stop various trackers on websites. You can customize Privacy Badger to set the security settings really high though it might break some websites. There is also a Facebook Container tool to limit the way Facebook is able to collect data on you as well.

Here is the tool: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/f ... container/ . I personally don't use Facebook myself, but if you use Facebook yourself, Privacy Badger, Facebook Container and customizing your private browser settings to erase all data every single time you exit out of your browser is a great way to limit the effects of cookie snarfing that Facebook engages in.

Here is the link to Privacy Bader: https://privacybadger.org/

Remember, if it's free, then you are the product and NOT the customer.

[Rancid]

I'd be all for a global facebook ban. Twitter, Instagram, tiktok, etc. etc.

[Beren]

I'd be all for a global facebook ban. Twitter, Instagram, tiktok, etc. etc.

Instagram could be a great place if you like exhibitionist women showing themselves off.

[Rugoz]

And who protects my data from being spied on by the French and ze Germans?

[Rancid]

And who protects my data from being spied on by the French and ze Germans?

No one.

Generally speaking, I've always heard that the EU is good about limiting private companies from spying on people, but the government is pretty free to do so. Is this true?

[Beren]

No one.

Generally speaking, I've always heard that the EU is good about limiting private companies from spying on people, but the government is pretty free to do so. Is this true?

The EU can't really protect you from your European government because it's a tool for them.

[Politics_Observer]

@Rancid

Generally speaking, I've always heard that the EU is good about limiting private companies from spying on people, but the government is pretty free to do so. Is this true?

I have no doubt that is probably true. Governments don't like having their power limited or circumvented. That applies here to the U.S. as well as Europe. If wanted to limit the ability of governments to spy on my communications I would rely on heavily vetted open source encryption software using military grade encryption.

I would also rely on similar type software to use asymmetric encryption to exchange symmetric encryption keys with people I am communicating with in order to circumvent a government from spying on me. But all the encryption software would have to be heavily vetted, open source and using military grade encryption as well as a combination of symmetric and asymmetric encryption. Initially use the asymmetric encryption to exchange the keys and then use symmetric encryption to continue communicating while changing up those symmetric keys often to prevent anybody from being able to gradually crack the symmetric keys over time.

[Rugoz]

No one.

Generally speaking, I've always heard that the EU is good about limiting private companies from spying on people, but the government is pretty free to do so. Is this true?

No idea, but I remember this:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/france-ha ... em-report/

[Atlantis]

Generally speaking, I've always heard that the EU is good about limiting private companies from spying on people, but the government is pretty free to do so. Is this true?

No, it's not true. There are numerous cases of governments being sued by the EU or by private individuals. Anybody has the right to sue his or her government at the European Court of Justice and EU governments have to abide by European law.

[Politics_Observer]

@Atlantis

That doesn't mean those governments aren't keeping secrets. If people don't know about it, people can't sue. Governments do keep secrets.

[Beren]

No, it's not true. There are numerous cases of governments being sued by the EU or by private individuals. Anybody has the right to sue his or her government at the European Court of Justice and EU governments have to abide by European law.

Sure, you can sue as you want, but the EU is pretty toothless even against the Hungarian government and can't do much even against the misuse of their own transfers, simply because it wasn't designed for that.

[Politics_Observer]

@Beren @Atlantis

Governments do whatever they want to do and don't need a rhyme or reason to do it. They are not worried about being sued even if they do get sued. That's how it is everywhere you go.

[JohnRawls]

No one.

Generally speaking, I've always heard that the EU is good about limiting private companies from spying on people, but the government is pretty free to do so. Is this true?

Regarding the government is pretty much the same as in the US. I mean if you catch the government doing it then technically it is illegal because of the rules that apply to everyone. The problem is, you know, catching the government in the act.

[Rancid]

Regarding the government is pretty much the same as in the US. I mean if you catch the government doing it then technically it is illegal because of the rules that apply to everyone. The problem is, you know, catching the government in the act.

I see. Yea, I'm not surprised. Was chatting with a coworker that grew up in Europe. Basically he was the one that told me that European countries are pretty good about limiting private companies from using your data, but the government is just as bad as anywhere else.

Do you think the EU goes after companies as a distraction from their own spying? Or do you think the government is just trying to protect its monopoly on spying?

[JohnRawls]

I see. Yea, I'm not surprised. Was chatting with a coworker that grew up in Europe. Basically he was the one that told me that European countries are pretty good about limiting private companies from using your data, but the government is just as bad as anywhere else.

Do you think the EU goes after companies as a distraction from their own spying? Or do you think the government is just trying to protect its monopoly on spying?

My opinion on this is that of importance of different needs, people and state. Basically, the government has an obligation to keep the people safe and has to follow some pre-agreed norms long term. Hence the need for privacy overrides the needs of corporate profit and that is why EU goes after them.

The governments also have a need to protect the people and the easiest way to do it is through espionage and intelligence gathering. I am pretty sure that the governments understand that they are doing illegal things but the need to protect the people overrides the need for privacy on the importance scale. So both EU and US governments are kind of in a silent understanding between the state and their intelligence services that the state won't harass the intelligence services about this and the intelligence services agree to keep it as quite as possible and out of sight.

Basically: Income and private profit < Human rights regarding privacy and private life, Human rights regarding privacy and private life < Need to keep the citizens safe. From a philosophical standpoint they are right of sorts. If a human is dead then what privacy is there to speak about. From a legal standpoint it has no basis whatsoever.