The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)’s historic decision in Schrems II, in which the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield was invalidated, requires businesses to rethink the mechanism they can rely on to transfer personal data from the EU to the United States and other countries. After several EU data protection authorities (DPAs) published their reactions, the European Data Protection Board (EDPB), an association comprising, inter alia, national DPAs of all EU Member States, presented its guidance in form of an FAQ.

At the time of its publication, the guidance comprises 12 FAQs. It will be updated with further analysis. While the EDPB notes that supplementary measures may be necessary when using standard contractual clauses (SCCs), it fails to specify what that means but promises to provide more guidance in the future. Summarized below are the key takeaways from the EDPB’s guidance.
Continue Reading EDPB Issues Data Transfer FAQs in the Post Privacy Shield Area

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)’s historic decision in Schrems II, in which the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield was invalidated, requires businesses to rethink the mechanism they can rely on to transfer personal data from the EU to the United States and other countries. However, how the decision will be enforced remains

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) declares invalid a decision of the European Commission which attested that the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield provided adequate protection to personal data transferred from the EU to the U.S., if the receiving party had self-certified its adherence to the Privacy Shield Principles. At the same time, the

EDPB says that cookie walls require a tracking-free alternative (not necessarily free of charge) and the German Federal Supreme Court rules against opt-out consent for tracking cookies under German law

Introduction

In 2019, various EU member states issued guidance as to whether opt-in consent is necessary for non-essential cookies, with some guidance suggesting opt-in

In August 2018, Brazil took a significant step by passing comprehensive data protection legislation: the General Data Protection Law (Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados Pessoais – Law No. 13,709/2018, as amended) (LGPD). The substantive part of the legislation takes effect August 16, 2020, leaving fewer than six short months for companies to prepare.

With the backdrop of an apricot-coral sunset from high above San Francisco Bay, Greenberg Traurig was pleased to welcome leaders from the United Kingdom’s Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), as part of an IAPP S.F. Bay Area Knowledgenet held at the law firm on February 11.

The U.K.’s Information Commissioner, Elizabeth Denham, and ICO Executive Director,

On Nov. 22, 2019, the representatives of the EU member states rejected the Finnish Presidency’s proposed text for the ePrivacy Regulation, making the future of ePrivacy Regulation uncertain. The ePrivacy Regulation, which if adopted would be binding across all EU member states, will govern direct electronic marketing messages, cookies, and similar tracking technologies. The ePrivacy

On October 1, 2019 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued a new judgment on the use of cookies which, under the EU E-Privacy Directive, requires users’ informed consent. The court decided that

  • the cookies consent cannot be obtained by using a pre-ticked consent checkbox; and
  • information must be provided to users

On Sept. 24, 2019, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) decided that the “right to be forgotten” does not require a search engine operator to carry out de-referencing on non-EU member state versions of its search engine.

Background

The case relates to a penalty of €100,000 that the French data protection authority,

On July 29, 2019, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEUfound that a website operator using a social media plugin is a joint controller with the social media company providing the plugin and can be held jointly liable in relation to such processing activities. Although the case was decided under