The challenge of navigating twenty or more different 
						sets of national data protection rules was recently 
						highlighted by MEP Timothy Kirkhope of the European 
						Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECR) who said: 
 
						
							
						
						The result of this ruling could be a patchwork of 
						different regimes across Europe and different 
						interpretations of how data should be stored and used. 
						Court rulings often leave fragmentation in their wake 
						which could be more damaging for businesses and 
						consumers in the long run.
 
						
							
						
						For US companies - or European companies transferring 
						data to the US - trying to avoid that headache, the only 
						other option that looks viable right now is the creation 
						of data centres based within Europe which would allow EU 
						data to stay within the Union rather than be transferred 
						to the US. Or worse - some countries could even follow 
						Russia's lead in deciding that their citizens' data must 
						remain within their own borders. The ruling comes after 
						law student and privacy advocate Max Schrems brought a 
						case against Facebook, saying his privacy had been 
						violated by the NSA's mass surveillance programs.
 
						
							
						
						Though he is Austrian, Schrems brought the case in 
						Ireland as the social network has its European 
						headquarters in Dublin.
 
						
							
						
						The country's then Data Protection Commissioner, Billy 
						Hawkes, rejected the case, saying Schrems couldn't 
						possibly know whether his own data had been spied on by 
						the PRISM program. He pointed to an EU Executive 
						Commission decision made in 2000 that stated that the US 
						offered adequate data protection under the Safe Harbor 
						agreement.
 
						
							
						
						In a subsequent case, however, Schrems successfully 
						argued before High Court Justice Gerard Hogan, who ruled 
						that he could pursue his case further as the NSA's aims 
						and methods were not compatible with the Irish 
						constitution, irrespective of whose data the agency may 
						or may not have been spying upon. Justice Hogan 
						escalated the case to the European Court of Justice.
 
						
							
						
						And so, today the ECJ made its decision, electing to 
						overturn the Irish Data Protection Commissioner's 
						ruling, saying that the Commissioner must now examine 
						Schrems' complaint "with all due diligence."
 
						
							
						
						Once it has concluded its investigation, the authority 
						must, according to a summary of the ECJ ruling:
 
						
							
						
						Decide whether, pursuant to the directive, transfer of 
						the data of Facebook's European subscribers to the 
						United States should be suspended on the ground that 
						that country does not afford an adequate level of 
						protection of personal data.
 
						
							
						
						The ruling of the ECJ is final and cannot be appealed, 
						though groups such as the ECR are hopeful that the EU 
						and US can now work together to "find a [political] 
						solution" that will be clear and consistent across all 
						member states.
 
						
							
						
						Speaking after the case, a jubilant Schrems said:
 
						
							
						
						I very much welcome the judgement of the Court, which 
						will hopefully be a milestone when it comes to online 
						privacy. This judgement draws a clear line.
 
						
							
						
						He did, however, point out that the judgement only 
						applied to a limited set of situations, namely the 
						transfer of EU data to US providers. This, he said, 
						meant the typical consumer would not see any changes in 
						their daily lives but they would be free from the 
						possibility of mass surveillance.
 
						
							
						
						Despite today's massive success, Schrems is likely to be 
						back in court again in the near future as his Europe vs 
						Facebook group continues to pursue a class action 
						lawsuit brought against the social network for alleged 
						privacy violations across the Union.
 
						
							
						
						
						Source:::::
						Naked Security, dated 06/10/2015.........