Facebook has warned that it may withdraw from Europe if the Irish Data Protection Commissioner imposes a ban on sharing data with the United States, after a landmark ruling by the European Court of Justice last July, which found insufficient safeguards. Intrusion by US intelligence agencies is prohibited.
Facebook’s assistant attorney general wrote in the lawsuit in Dublin that enforcing the ban would render the company unable to operate.
And Yvonne Conan said, “If Facebook stops completely transferring user data to the United States, it is not clear in these circumstances how it will continue to provide services in the European Union.”
Facebook denied that the statement was a threat, describing it as a simple reflection of reality. A Facebook spokesman said that the company does not threaten to withdraw from Europe.
The legal documents submitted to the Irish Supreme Court illustrate a simple fact; To the effect that Facebook and many other companies, institutions, and services depend on data transfers between the European Union and the United States to operate their services.
The lack of safe and legal international data transfers will hurt the economy and hinder the growth of the data-dependent business in the European Union.
Austrian lawyer Max Schrimms began filing privacy complaints with the Irish Data Protection Commissioner, who has been regulating Facebook’s work in the European Union since 2011 (Reuters)
The decision is the latest blow in a legal battle that has lasted nearly a decade. In 2011 Austrian lawyer Max Schrimms began filing privacy complaints with the Irish Data Protection Commissioner, who regulates Facebook in the European Union about social network practices.
These complaints gained momentum two years later when the Guardian revealed the NSA’s “Prism” program. This large-scale monitoring process includes direct access to Google and Apple systems and Facebook and other companies Other American Internet.
Screams filed another privacy complaint, which was eventually referred to the European Court of Justice.
This court found in 2015 that due to the presence of Prism, the Safe Harbor agreement, which allowed US companies to transfer data of European Union citizens to America, was not applicable in this case.
Then the European Union tried to conclude a second legal agreement for the transfer of data, which is called the Privacy Shield; It was overturned in July of this year. The court ruling again that the United States does not limit the monitoring of EU citizens.
In September, the Irish Data Protection Commissioner began enforcing this ruling, and the commissioner issued a preliminary order requiring the social network to suspend data transfers abroad.
In response, Nick Clegg, the company’s head of global affairs and communications, published a blog in which he argued that “international data transfers support the global economy and support many of the essential services in our daily lives.”
“In the worst-case scenario, this could mean that a small tech startup in Germany will no longer be able to use a US-based cloud service provider,” Clegg wrote.
“The Spanish product development company is no longer able to operate a process across multiple time zones, and it may find a French retailer unable to maintain a call center in Morocco,” he added.
“We support global rules that can ensure consistent data handling around the world,” Clegg said.
Source: The Guardian