Photo of Andrea C. Maciejewski

Andrea C. Maciejewski designs and implements privacy and security programs for clients of all sizes – from Fortune 500s to start ups – and in all sectors, including digital entertainment, marketing, online education, retail, and consumer goods. Andrea helps companies navigate the intricacies of multi-jurisdictional compliance programs as well as compliance with sector-specific data privacy and security laws. Andrea offers clients practical legal counsel, striving to understand the underlying business model and provide strategies that manage costs and risks, while attempting to maintain the businesses operations.

Her practice includes international data privacy laws and regulations, including the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) and China’s Personal Information Protection Law (“PIPL”), as well as U.S. federal and state data privacy laws, such as the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (“COPPA”), the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (“FERPA”), and the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”). Some of the specialized documents Andrea drafts include data processing addendums, intracompany agreements, cross-border transfer mechanisms, privacy policies, privacy impact assessments, and data inventories. She has experience in U.S. and multi-national record retention practices, and frequently counsels on updating those practices for compliance with new privacy laws.

Additionally, Andrea provides expert counsel on data concerns unique to video games, eSports, and mobile gaming.

The following is part of Greenberg Traurig’s ongoing series analyzing cross-border data transfers in light of the new Standard Contractual Clauses approved by the European Commission in June 2021.

Visual Implications
  • Background. Company Z-1 and Company Z-2 are corporate affiliates who are under common ownership or control, but are separate legal entities. Data is

The following is part of Greenberg Traurig’s ongoing series analyzing cross-border data transfers in light of the new Standard Contractual Clauses approved by the European Commission in June 2021.

Visual Implications
Transfers from EEA Controller to EEA Processor: Controller (EEA)→ Processor (EEA) → Affiliated Processor (US)
  • Background. Company Z-1 and Company Z-2 are corporate affiliates under common ownership or control, but are separate legal entities. Data is being directly

The following is part of Greenberg Traurig’s ongoing series analyzing cross-border data transfers in light of the new Standard Contractual Clauses approved by the European Commission in June 2021.

Visual Implications
Controller (EEA) Processor (EEA) → Employee of Processor (non-EEA)
  • Background. Company Z is a European legal entity that does not have a legal presence in Country Q. Company Z has an employee

The following is part of Greenberg Traurig’s ongoing series analyzing cross-border data transfers in light of the new Standard Contractual Clauses approved by the European Commission in June of 2021.

Visual Implications
  • 1st SCC Module 1. Initial cross-border transfer from Company A to Company B utilizes the SCC Module 1 designed for transfers from

The following is part of Greenberg Traurig’s ongoing series analyzing cross-border data transfers in light of the new Standard Contractual Clauses approved by the European Commission in June of 2021.

Visual

Implications

  • Initial cross-border transfer from the EEA to the US utilizes the SCC Module 1 designed for transfers from a controller to another non-EEA

The following is part of Greenberg Traurig’s ongoing series analyzing cross-border data transfers in light of the new Standard Contractual Clauses approved by the European Commission in June 2021.

Visual Implications
  • 1st SCC Module 1. Initial cross-border transfer from the EEA to the US utilizes the SCC Module 1 designed for transfers from a

  • Background. Company B-1 and Company B-2 are corporate affiliates who are under common ownership or control but are separate legal entities. Company B-2 is the processor of Company B-1. While data is being directly sent from Company A in Europe to Company B-2, Company B-2 is not acting as the processor of Company A;

  • Background. Company B-1 and Company B-2 are corporate affiliates who are under common ownership or control but are separate legal entities. While data is being directly sent from Controller A in Europe to Controller B-2 in the United States, Controller A has contracted only with Controller B-1 in Europe. Solid line indicates the data

Visual Implications
  • 1st SCC Module 1. Initial cross-border transfer from Company A to Company B utilizes the SCC Module 1 designed for transfers from a controller to a non-EEA Controller.
  • 2nd SCC Module 2. Pursuant to Section 8.7 of the 1st SCC, all subsequent onward transfers to non-adequate jurisdictions must also utilize the

Visual Implications
  • 1st SCC Module 1. Initial cross-border transfer from Company A to Company B utilizes the SCC Module 1 designed for transfers from a controller to a non-EEA Controller (1st SCC).
  • 2nd SCC Module 2. Pursuant to Section 8.7 of the 1st SCC, all subsequent onward transfers to non-adequate jurisdictions must also