Hi Fukami I hope you're right that the lobbyists are out of the game for now. Their current tactic seems to be a delaying one: the advertising industry reps in particular are lobbying against doing anything too fast, and saying that there won't be an agreement over the regulations until 2014 at least - something most of us suspected anyway. They're hoping, I think, that the PRISM story will be short-lived, and in a few months time they'll be able to bring the lobby machine back into action on a big scale. I'm hoping that's not the case, of course: this could be a key moment for privacy people to get their message across and to have some kind of real effect.
Paul Dr Paul Bernal Lecturer UEA Law School University of East Anglia Norwich Research Park Norwich NR4 7TJ email: paul.ber...@uea.ac.uk<mailto:paul.ber...@uea.ac.uk> Web: http://www.paulbernal.co.uk/ Blog: http://paulbernal.wordpress.com/ Twitter: @paulbernalUK On 21 Jun 2013, at 08:20, fukami <f...@foo.io<mailto:f...@foo.io>> wrote: Hey Paul! On 18.06.2013, at 11:48, Paul Bernal (LAW) <paul.ber...@uea.ac.uk<mailto:paul.ber...@uea.ac.uk>> wrote: This all needs to be viewed in the context of complex and contentious internal wrangling within the EU over the data protection reform package. What the PRISM saga does is strengthen the hand of those within the EU advocating for a stronger new package, and less watering down. To an extent this is an internal battle - and the Eurocrats don't care as much what the US thinks. To me it's more 'Germany vs UK' than it is 'Germany vs US', if you see what I mean. Thanks for pointing this out, I fully agree (at least as far I'm able to understand what's going at EP). I was mainly referring to the influence of US lobbyist to weaken data protection over the last couple of months. Even if I don't trust many politicians, for me it looks like these lobbyists are out of the game for now. And there seems to be a good chance to get article 42 back. Ultimately they know that US businesses may well ignore large swathes of the new regulation, but they'll use that regulation for horse-trading, in the way they've done with European competition regulation for decades. Well, if Safe Harbour dies it would have an impact for US companies (but maybe I'm just too optimistic). Cheers, fukami -- Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu<mailto:compa...@stanford.edu> or changing your settings at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
-- Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
