Advertisement

June 19, 2013

Comprehensive Data Protection Reform Proposal Released by European Commission

International Data Protection and Privacy Day is Saturday, January 28th.  

The European Commission certainly found a way to mark the day.  After weeks of intense speculation, the European Commission has released its sweeping package of legislation to reform the Data Protection Directive.   

We are analyzing the entire legislative package, which includes a new regulation and  a directive and will comprise a single set of data protection rules for all of the European Union. 

Key provisions that will impact US companies:

  • Extraterritorial application.  In her press conference earlier today, EU Commissioner Viviane Reding made it perfectly clear that this new data protection scheme will be apply to EU based companies and non-EU based companies that either process data of individuals residing in the EU to whom they offer goods or services, or whose activities serve to monitor the behavior of such individuals.   This is virtually any company operating online.
  • “One-stop-shop” for EU data controllers — but not for non-EU controllers.  EU data controllers will be supervised by the data protection authority of the Member State where the controller’s “main establishment” is based.  Non-EU based controllers must designate a representative in one of the Member States where they target data subjects.  We’ll have further analysis on this point.   
  • Data transfers.  The existing EU restriction on data transfers to countries that do not offer adequate protection remains in place.  However, the use of standard contractual clauses will no longer be subject to prior authorization or approval by data protection authorities.  Also, the adoption of binding corporate rules (BCRs) would be made easier, and the regime would be extended to data processors; an entire section is devoted to BCRs.   US companies with multinational operations should start thinking about the BCR process.
  • Specific rules on consent.  The existing data protection rules include certain grounds for lawful processing of personal data,  including consent.   The concept of “consent” and cross-border transfers of personal data for processing in the human resources context has always proven vexing and not well defined.  The draft law now contains a stand-alone section on consent — and a definition:  any “freely given specific, informed and explicit indication of will”.  Consent cannot be used as a legal basis for processing personal data where “there is a clear imbalance between the data subject and the controller.”  This appears to be problematic for US companies that have relied on some sort of consent from employees for the processing of personal data. 
  • Breach notification.  The draft Regulation, as we discussed here, introduces a comprehensive breach notification requirement.  It specifies that data controllers must notify any data breach to the supervisory authority “without undue delay and, where feasible, within 24 hours”.   When discussing the “undue delay” qualifer, Commissioner Reding added, “for me [this] means 24 hours.”
  • Mandatory Data Protection Officer.  Organizations employing 250 persons or more must designate a data protection officer.
©1994-2013 Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. All Rights Reserved.

About the Author

Member

Cynthia is a Member of Mintz Levin’s Corporate & Securities Section, Chair of the Privacy & Security practice, and a Certified Information Privacy Professional (CIPP). Cynthia represents companies in information, communications, and technology, including e-commerce and other electronic transactions. She counsels clients through all stages of the “corporate lifecycle,” from start-ups through mid- and later-stage financings to IPO, and has broad experience in technology and business law, including online contracting issues, licensing, domain name issues, software...

(617) 348-1732

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.