New TISA Leak: US On Collision Course With EU Over Global Data Flows
from the would-be-fun-to-watch-if-only-it-weren't-secret dept
Although most attention has been given to the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (TPP) and the Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (TAFTA), also known as TTIP, it's important to remember that a third set of global trade negotiations are underway -- those for the Trade in Services Agreement (TISA), which involves more countries than either of the other two. Like TPP and TAFTA/TTIP, TISA is being negotiated in strict secrecy, but earlier this year the financial services annex leaked, giving us the first glimpse of the kind of bad ideas that were being worked on. Now, another leak has surfaced, which reveals the US's proposals to free up data flows online.For the European Union, that's a hugely sensitive issue. Under data protection laws there, personal data cannot be sent outside the EU unless companies sign up to the self-certification scheme known as the Safe Harbor framework. However, in the wake of Snowden's revelations about NSA spying in Europe, the European Parliament has called for the Safe Harbor scheme to be suspended. If that happens, the only way that US Internet companies could comply with the EU Data Protection Directive would be to hold personal information about EU citizens on servers physically located in Europe. But it is precisely that kind of requirement the leaked TISA position seeks to forbid:
Article X.2: Local ContentAnother section would stop countries from imposing any restrictions on data flows:
l. Subject to any conditions, limitations and qualifications set out in its Schedule, no Party may, in connection with the supply of a service by a service supplier, impose or enforce any requirement; enforce any commitment or undertaking; or, in connection with the supply of a service through commercial presence, condition the receipt or continued receipt of an advantage on compliance with any requirement:
(a) to purchase, use or accord a preference to:
...
(iii) computing facilities located in its territory or computer processing or storage services supplied from within its territory;
Article X.4: Movement of InformationIt comes as no surprise that the US is pushing for the unhindered cross-border flow of all data, including personal data: it's what both the USTR and US companies have been demanding for a while. But it's going to be hard to get the European Union to agree to such a direct attack on its privacy framework. The European Commission has publicly stated that TISA will not undermine the EU's data protection laws. Moreover, just a few hours after the TISA leak was published, the EU politician with responsibility for TISA in the European Parliament, Viviane Reding, tweeted as follows:
No Party may prevent a service supplier of another Party from transferring, accessing, processing or storing information, including personal information, within or outside the Party's territory, where such activity is carried out in connection with the conduct of the service supplier's business.
As @EP_Trade Rapporteur on #TiSA, I'll oppose any provision undermining right to data privacy: competition by the rules, not for the rules!With such entrenched positions on both sides, it's hard to see how any kind of compromise will be possible. The imminent battle between the US and the EU on this key issue in TISA will doubtless be fun to watch; what a pity it will happen in secret, behind closed doors.
Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and +glynmoody on Google+
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: data, data protection, data storage, eu, local content, privacy, safe harbors, tisa
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
All your data are belong to us!
Anyone care to predict which the next '...ist' group will be paraded around as boo-man? I say we go after the most uber cyber pirate villains around: the NSA =D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If the premise were true we'd all be right to be worried .... but it isn't.
I've been following this negotiation since before it officially began. There was a very early agreement amongst the parties that the existing exceptions for GATS (General Agreement on Trade in Services) for privacy amongst others would be horizontally applicable in this agreement.
That's why there's no privacy exception in the US proposal. The reason why there is a national security exception is because the US is proposing an exception that is broader than GATS'security exception.
I know beating up on trade agreements is popular - but if it is going to take place, we all have a responsibility to ensure that criticism is accurate and relates to the actual problem in hand. Simply reading one 4-page offer from one country and assuming that means you know what is going on is frankly irresponsible.
Data protection and privacy in a global Internet is simply too important to debate this way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: If the premise were true we'd all be right to be worried .... but it isn't.
Not many people care about the details anymore, pretty much every second day we see something the US does to fuck over others.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: If the premise were true we'd all be right to be worried .... but it isn't.
As negotiations are secret, there is no other way for public debate on a treaty that affects the public.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: If the premise were true we'd all be right to be worried .... but it isn't.
If the parties privvy to more unbiased information would devulge them, the debate may improve. But as long as the basic draft, negotiation positions or at least a reasonable security valve for public concerns after negotiations are assigned prior to signing (when the text gets locked!), you will inevitably find debate distorted.
You are basically asking him to shut up unless he gets access to other informations he isn't cleared for...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: If the premise were true we'd all be right to be worried .... but it isn't.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: If the premise were true we'd all be right to be worried .... but it isn't.
If you haven't heard then, all these trade treaties are being held in secret. The public doesn't get to know what is in them and as far as I am concerned that means I don't have the facts to debate them, any more than you do unless you are on the inside with access to those facts.
That it is being held in secret tells me there is a lot of dirty going in these treaties that wouldn't stand the light of day, just like the last batch that has been going down the pipeline. As far as the public goes there is no debate and that is a serious problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: If the premise were true we'd all be right to be worried .... but it isn't.
So... we're supposed to keep our mouths shut until they're ready to ram it down our throat? Let them publish the drafts for discussion and debate by the affected peoples, now that would be "responsible." Until then, we're going to have to discuss it based on whatever meager scraps of information and rumor that we can find.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: If the premise were true we'd all be right to be worried .... but it isn't.
These agreements are being debated not just in secret, but without the involvement or agreement of the largest and most important "stakeholder": the citizens of the nations involved.
That is sufficient reason to view these agreements with extreme suspicion all by itself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: If the premise were true we'd all be right to be worried .... but it isn't.
If those in the 'discussions' of the agreements feel that that is unfair, then they are welcome to make the texts public, but until they do that, I'd say it's fair for the public to assume that anything and everything being discussed is being kept secret due to being so incredibly damaging to the public and their rights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: If the premise were true we'd all be right to be worried .... but it isn't.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
By the time the treaty is dead, we start over with a new treaty. And if we actually want a good international treaty, we can either do that openly or tie up the lobby-groups in domestic stuff.
The hard part is getting someone to actually pull this off...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I hope the EU sticks by its guns on this
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You don't gather up a massive treasure-trove of dirty little secrets and then bribe people, you use that treasure-trove of dirty little secrets and blackmail them. Much cheaper.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]