The enactment of the USA FREEDOM Act was news unto itself. However, the impact that the surveillance reform legislation may have on cross-border data transfers could turn out to be newsworthy as well. In this post, we summarize some important elements of the legislation and explore the USA FREEDOM Act’s potential to influence more than government surveillance practices.
Two federal appeals courts recently published significant opinions that redefine the scope of government access to phone records, setting the stage for a complex debate in Congress over the future of bulk data collection under the Patriot Act. The pair of decisions, along with the outcome of a legislative debate that has roiled Congress this month, will define the permissible boundaries for government surveillance and contribute to the ongoing debate over government access to digital information in all forms. We summarize both decisions as well as the congressional debate below.
In its recent Open Internet Order, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission determined that broadband Internet access services are appropriately classified as common carrier “telecommunications services” under the Telecommunications Act of 1996. In doing so, the agency established itself as the primary U.S. data privacy and security regulator for those services and triggered additional requirements under the Act. It also promised a future rulemaking that could result in a sea change in how ISPs and their business partners interact with consumer data. Although the decision is widely expected to be appealed in court, organizations operating across the broadband ecosystem would be prudent to assess the potential impact on their current and planned online service portfolio.
At the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board hearing yesterday in Washington, D.C., Hogan Lovells partner and privacy practice lead Christopher Wolf spoke on the issue of privacy and government surveillance and provided a transnational perspective on legal regimes that regulate government access to data. In 2012 and 2013, Hogan Lovells published four White Papers (available here, here, here, and here) on government access to data in the cloud. The findings of the national security access White Paper, A Sober Look at National Security Access to Data in the Cloud, were a focal point of yesterday’s discussion.
At the 35th annual Conference of Data Protection Authorities and Privacy Commissioners in Warsaw, Poland today, Hogan Lovells partner and privacy practice lead Christopher Wolf spoke on the issue of privacy and trade in light of the ongoing Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership negotiations between the EU and the U.S. This post contains prepared remarks to the commissioner’s on the need for interoperable cross-border privacy standards and the merits of the U.S. privacy regime.
Recent work done by Hogan Lovells on EU national security access to data shows that the American intelligence-gathering framework imposes at least as much, if not more, due process and oversight on foreign intelligence surveillance than other countries afford in similar circumstances. In a detailed analysis of the misconceptions related to U.S. government intelligence-gathering for the IAPP Privacy Perspectives blog, Chis Wolf outlines “A Sober Look at National Security Access to Data in the Cloud,” a recently published Hogan Lovells white paper comparing U.S. intelligence-gathering under the FISA Amendments Act to the practices of five European countries.
Hogan Lovells has published a White Paper demonstrating that, contrary to recent reports, the limitations applied to U.S. law enforcement access to data stored in the Cloud during national security and foreign intelligence investigation surpass in many cases restrictions applied during similar investigations in other countries. “A Sober Look at National Security Access to Data in the Cloud,” written by Christopher Wolf and Winston Maxwell, lawyers in Hogan Lovells’ Privacy and Information Management Practice based out of the Washington D.C. and Paris offices, was released today at a panel of the authors which was presented by the OpenForum Academy in Brussels. The authors also will discuss the paper tomorrow in Paris at a roundtable discussion comparing U.S. and French government access to data in the cloud presented by the American Chamber of Commerce in France.
On February 26, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Clapper v. Amnesty International that a group of U.S. citizens and U.S.-based organizations did not have standing to challenge the constitutionality of a provision of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that allows the U.S. Government to monitor the electronic communications of non-U.S. persons located on […]