Abstract
Stronger institutionalisation of transatlantic privacy politics seems to be the next logical step in view of the growing social and economic importance of transatlantic data flow. The U.S. and the EU have set up multiple transatlantic institutions in the past. These specialised institutions are not based on a prior consensus on the value of privacy; rather, they are meant to contribute to the creation of such a consensus over time. In practice, however, the success of the specialised transatlantic institutions has been rather modest. Robust institutions will be indispensable for the success of data transfer regulation in the future. However, in view of the complex interests at stake, we need to be careful in choosing the right institutions to which we wish to entrust the matter.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
See Tzanou, in this volume.
- 4.
See also Bignami and Resta (2015), p. 231.
- 5.
EDRi (2016).
- 6.
On the recent privacy-friendly reform of some NSA programs see Wischmeyer (2017).
- 7.
Wischmeyer (2016).
- 8.
Layton (2016).
- 9.
- 10.
This is by no means meant to deny “the important role played by the protection of personal data in the light of the fundamental right to respect for private life” (Case C-362/14, Maximillian Schrems v. Data Protection Commissioner, ECLI:EU:C:2015:650 (2015)).
- 11.
On the current Article 26 of Directive 95/46/EC see, e.g., Article 29 Working Party, Working document on a common interpretation of Article 26(1) of Directive 95/46/EC of 24 October 1995 (WP 114, 25 November 2005); Commission Decision 2010/87/EU of 5 February 2010 on standard contractual clauses for the transfer of personal data to processors established in third countries under Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, [2010] OJ L39/5. See also Moerel (2012).
- 12.
Cf. Kuner (2013).
References
Bamberger KA, Mulligan DK (2015) Privacy on the ground. Driving corporate behavior in the United States and Europe. MIT Press
Bignami F, Resta G (2015) Transatlantic privacy regulation. Conflict and cooperation. Law Contemp Probl 78:231
EDRi (2016) Privacy shield: privacy sham, 12 July 2016. https://edri.org/privacy-shield-privacy-sham/
Kuner C (2013) Transborder data flows and data privacy laws. OUP
Layton R (2016) Europe’s protectionist privacy advocates. The Wall Street Journal, 9 March 2016. http://www.wsj.com/articles/europes-protectionist-privacy-advocates-1457566423
Meltzer JP (2014) The importance of the Internet and transatlantic data flows for U.S. and EU Trade and Investment. Brookings Working Paper 79, October 2014. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/internet-transatlantic-data-flows-version-2.pdf
Moerel L (2012) Binding corporate rules: corporate self-regulation of global data transfers. OUP
Schwartz PM (2013) The EU-US privacy collision: a turn to institutions and procedures. Harv Law Rev 126:1966
von Arnauld A (2016) Transnationaler Schutz der Privatsphäre aus Sicht des Völkerrechts. In: Dethloff N, Nolte G, Reinisch A (eds) Freiheit und Regulierung in der Cyberwelt – Rechtsidentifikation zwischen Quelle und Gericht. Berichte der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Internationales Recht, vol 47. Heidelberg
von Bernstorff J (2003) Democratic global Internet regulation? Governance networks, international law and the shadow of hegemony. Eur Law J 9:511
Whitman JQ (2004) The two western cultures of privacy: dignity versus liberty. Yale Law J 113:1151
Wischmeyer T (2016) ‘Faraway, so close!’ – a constitutional perspective on transatlantic data flow regulation, 30 October 2016. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2877548
Wischmeyer T (2017) Schranken für die weltweite Überwachung? VerfBlog. https://doi.org/10.17176/20170502-103734
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wischmeyer, T. (2018). Epilogue Debate: Transatlantic Data Flow—Which Kind of Institutionalisation?. In: Fahey, E. (eds) Institutionalisation beyond the Nation State. Studies in European Economic Law and Regulation, vol 10. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50221-2_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50221-2_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-50220-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-50221-2
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)