Trade and privacy: complicated bedfellows? How to achieve data protection-proof free trade agreements external link

Irion, K., Yakovleva, S. & Bartl, M.
2016

Abstract

Study commissioned by the European Consumer Organisation/Bureau Européen des Unions de Consommateurs (BEUC), Center for Digital Democracy (CDD), The Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue (TACD) and European Digital Rights (EDRi), 13 July 2016, Amsterdam. The results of the study were widely covered in the Dutch and European media: ‘Privacy onvoldoende gewaarborgd in handelsverdragen EU‘, nu.nl, 13 juli 2016 ‘EU stelt privacy burgers onvoldoende veilig‘, Digital Telegraaf, 13 juli 2016 ‘EU stelt privacy burgers onvoldoende veilig‘, Einhovens Dagblad, 13 juli 2016 Monika Ermert, ‘Transatlantischer Zoff: Digitaler Datenschutz oder digitaler Protektionismus?‘, 16 July 2016, heise.de Léa Auffret, ‘Why privacy safeguards in trade deals need urgent improvement‘, 20 October 2016, beuc.eu

frontpage, Grondrechten, Privacy

Bibtex

Report{nokey, title = {Trade and privacy: complicated bedfellows? How to achieve data protection-proof free trade agreements}, author = {Irion, K. and Yakovleva, S. and Bartl, M.}, url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/trade_and_privacy.pdf}, year = {0714}, date = {2016-07-14}, abstract = {Study commissioned by the European Consumer Organisation/Bureau Européen des Unions de Consommateurs (BEUC), Center for Digital Democracy (CDD), The Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue (TACD) and European Digital Rights (EDRi), 13 July 2016, Amsterdam. The results of the study were widely covered in the Dutch and European media: ‘Privacy onvoldoende gewaarborgd in handelsverdragen EU‘, nu.nl, 13 juli 2016 ‘EU stelt privacy burgers onvoldoende veilig‘, Digital Telegraaf, 13 juli 2016 ‘EU stelt privacy burgers onvoldoende veilig‘, Einhovens Dagblad, 13 juli 2016 Monika Ermert, ‘Transatlantischer Zoff: Digitaler Datenschutz oder digitaler Protektionismus?‘, 16 July 2016, heise.de Léa Auffret, ‘Why privacy safeguards in trade deals need urgent improvement‘, 20 October 2016, beuc.eu}, keywords = {frontpage, Grondrechten, Privacy}, }

Chefsache: Bestuurders aansprakelijk na ernstige cyberaanval external link

2016

Bescherming van communicatie, frontpage, Grondrechten

Bibtex

Other{nokey, title = {Chefsache: Bestuurders aansprakelijk na ernstige cyberaanval}, author = {Arnbak, A.}, url = {https://axelarnbak.nl/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/FD24.pdf}, year = {0617}, date = {2016-06-17}, keywords = {Bescherming van communicatie, frontpage, Grondrechten}, }

Nieuw toezicht: Stortvloed aan data schreeuwt om ingrijpen external link

2016

Bescherming van communicatie, frontpage, Grondrechten

Bibtex

Other{nokey, title = {Nieuw toezicht: Stortvloed aan data schreeuwt om ingrijpen}, author = {Arnbak, A.}, url = {https://axelarnbak.nl/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/FD23.pdf}, year = {0520}, date = {2016-05-20}, keywords = {Bescherming van communicatie, frontpage, Grondrechten}, }

Securing Private Communications: Protecting Private Communications Security in EU Law – Fundamental Rights, Functional Value Chains and Market Incentives external link

0701

frontpage, Kluwer Information Law Series

Bibtex

Book{nokey, title = {Securing Private Communications: Protecting Private Communications Security in EU Law – Fundamental Rights, Functional Value Chains and Market Incentives}, author = {Arnbak, A.}, url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1803}, year = {0701}, date = {2016-07-01}, keywords = {frontpage, Kluwer Information Law Series}, }

Netherlands: New Notification Obligations and Fines under the Dutch Data Protection Act external link

European Data Protection Law Review, vol. 2, num: 2, pp: 224-226, 2016

frontpage, Grondrechten, Privacy

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Netherlands: New Notification Obligations and Fines under the Dutch Data Protection Act}, author = {Eskens, S.}, url = {http://edpl.lexxion.eu/article/EDPL/2016/2/12}, year = {0701}, date = {2016-07-01}, journal = {European Data Protection Law Review}, volume = {2}, number = {2}, pages = {224-226}, keywords = {frontpage, Grondrechten, Privacy}, }

Annotatie bij EHRM 4 december 2015 (Roman Zakharov/Rusland) external link

Computerrecht, vol. 2016, num: 3, pp: 178-189, 2016

frontpage, Grondrechten, Privacy

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Annotatie bij EHRM 4 december 2015 (Roman Zakharov/Rusland)}, author = {Eskens, S.}, url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1801}, year = {0701}, date = {2016-07-01}, journal = {Computerrecht}, volume = {2016}, number = {3}, pages = {178-189}, keywords = {frontpage, Grondrechten, Privacy}, }

The freedom of expression contours of copyright in the digital era: A European perspective

Journal of World Intellectual Property , vol. 19, iss. : 3-4, pp: 115-130, 2016

Abstract

This paper analyses the influence of the right to freedom of expression and information on European copyright law in the digital context. Drawing on the practice of the two major European courts—the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)—it begins by exploring how this fundamental right shapes both the scope of copyright protection in Europe and what is traditionally termed as “exceptions and limitations” to exclusive rights. Specifically, a long-standing practice of the ECtHR, in accordance with which copyright in turn may be viewed as an exception to freedom of expression and must hence be narrowly interpreted, is scrutinized. On a related note, a recent recourse by the CJEU to the language of “users' rights” is examined, inasmuch as it allows for a reconceptualization—in a normative framework of freedom of information—of copyright “exceptions” not as the exceptions as such, but as the equal rights of users of protected subject-matter. In this regard, the locus standi of “mere users” of online content and the somewhat diverging approaches of the Strasbourg and Luxemburg courts toward granting thereof are addressed. The paper then turns to discuss the recent recourse by the European courts to freedom of expression as a means to define the role of internet service providers in digital copyright enforcement, implicating issues ranging from the providers' liability in respect of the third-party content posted online to the often far-reaching injunctions imposed on non-liable intermediaries. Several conclusions are drawn from the above analysis, reflecting on the potential of freedom of expression and information to inform the development of European standards applicable in the field of digital copyright.

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {The freedom of expression contours of copyright in the digital era: A European perspective}, author = {Izyumenko, E.}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1111/jwip.12057}, year = {2016}, date = {2016-07-01}, journal = {Journal of World Intellectual Property }, volume = {19}, issue = {3-4}, pages = {115-130}, abstract = {This paper analyses the influence of the right to freedom of expression and information on European copyright law in the digital context. Drawing on the practice of the two major European courts—the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)—it begins by exploring how this fundamental right shapes both the scope of copyright protection in Europe and what is traditionally termed as “exceptions and limitations” to exclusive rights. Specifically, a long-standing practice of the ECtHR, in accordance with which copyright in turn may be viewed as an exception to freedom of expression and must hence be narrowly interpreted, is scrutinized. On a related note, a recent recourse by the CJEU to the language of “users\' rights” is examined, inasmuch as it allows for a reconceptualization—in a normative framework of freedom of information—of copyright “exceptions” not as the exceptions as such, but as the equal rights of users of protected subject-matter. In this regard, the locus standi of “mere users” of online content and the somewhat diverging approaches of the Strasbourg and Luxemburg courts toward granting thereof are addressed. The paper then turns to discuss the recent recourse by the European courts to freedom of expression as a means to define the role of internet service providers in digital copyright enforcement, implicating issues ranging from the providers\' liability in respect of the third-party content posted online to the often far-reaching injunctions imposed on non-liable intermediaries. Several conclusions are drawn from the above analysis, reflecting on the potential of freedom of expression and information to inform the development of European standards applicable in the field of digital copyright.}, }

Oneerlijke handelspraktijken: alternatief voor privacyhandhaving external link

Mediaforum, num: 4, pp: 102-109., 2016

Abstract

Privacyhandhaving vindt in Europa vrijwel uitsluitend plaats door nationale privacytoezichthouders. Zij passen primair sectorspecifieke regulering toe gebaseerd op de Europese Privacyrichtlijn.2 De verantwoordelijkheid ligt primair bij de onafhankelijke nationale privacytoezichthouders. In de Verenigde Staten wordt op federaal niveau privacy vooral gehandhaafd door de Federal Trade Commission op basis van algemene regels inzake misleidende en oneerlijke handelspraktijken. In dit artikel wordt het Amerikaanse systeem besproken en naast de Europese kaders gezet. Hieruit blijkt dat ook in Europa de regels over handelspraktijken kunnen worden ingezet voor privacyhandhaving. Er zijn goede argumenten om dit ook te doen: veel fricties betreffen het op markt/consumenten-gericht gebruik van persoonsgegevens. Het ligt dan voor de hand om deze fricties dan ook binnen markt/consument kaders aan de orde te stellen.

frontpage, Grondrechten, Privacy

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {Oneerlijke handelspraktijken: alternatief voor privacyhandhaving}, author = {Kannekens, E. and van Eijk, N.}, url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1800}, year = {0624}, date = {2016-06-24}, journal = {Mediaforum}, number = {4}, abstract = {Privacyhandhaving vindt in Europa vrijwel uitsluitend plaats door nationale privacytoezichthouders. Zij passen primair sectorspecifieke regulering toe gebaseerd op de Europese Privacyrichtlijn.2 De verantwoordelijkheid ligt primair bij de onafhankelijke nationale privacytoezichthouders. In de Verenigde Staten wordt op federaal niveau privacy vooral gehandhaafd door de Federal Trade Commission op basis van algemene regels inzake misleidende en oneerlijke handelspraktijken. In dit artikel wordt het Amerikaanse systeem besproken en naast de Europese kaders gezet. Hieruit blijkt dat ook in Europa de regels over handelspraktijken kunnen worden ingezet voor privacyhandhaving. Er zijn goede argumenten om dit ook te doen: veel fricties betreffen het op markt/consumenten-gericht gebruik van persoonsgegevens. Het ligt dan voor de hand om deze fricties dan ook binnen markt/consument kaders aan de orde te stellen.}, keywords = {frontpage, Grondrechten, Privacy}, }

The Best of Both Worlds? Free Trade in Services and EU Law on Privacy and Data Protection external link

European Data Protection Law Review, num: 2, pp: 191-208., 2016

Abstract

The article focuses on the interplay between European Union (EU) law on privacy and data protection and international trade law, in particular the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and the WTO dispute settlement system. The argument distinguishes between the effects of international trade law in the EU legal order on the one hand, and, on the other hand, how EU data protection law would fare in a hypothetical challenge under the GATS. The contribution will apply international trade law and the general exception in GATS Article XIV to typical requirements stemming from EU data protection law, especially on transfers of personal data to third countries. The article enumerates the specific legal risks for defending EU law on privacy and data protection and explains the practical implications of its hypothetical challenge under the GATS. These insights could be useful for the EU’s negotiators of the future bi- or multilateral free trade agreements, notably the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and the Trade in Services Agreement.

frontpage, Grondrechten, Privacy

Bibtex

Article{nokey, title = {The Best of Both Worlds? Free Trade in Services and EU Law on Privacy and Data Protection}, author = {Yakovleva, S. and Irion, K.}, url = {http://www.ivir.nl/irion_yakovleva-2016-the-best-of-both-worlds/}, year = {0624}, date = {2016-06-24}, journal = {European Data Protection Law Review}, number = {2}, abstract = {The article focuses on the interplay between European Union (EU) law on privacy and data protection and international trade law, in particular the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and the WTO dispute settlement system. The argument distinguishes between the effects of international trade law in the EU legal order on the one hand, and, on the other hand, how EU data protection law would fare in a hypothetical challenge under the GATS. The contribution will apply international trade law and the general exception in GATS Article XIV to typical requirements stemming from EU data protection law, especially on transfers of personal data to third countries. The article enumerates the specific legal risks for defending EU law on privacy and data protection and explains the practical implications of its hypothetical challenge under the GATS. These insights could be useful for the EU’s negotiators of the future bi- or multilateral free trade agreements, notably the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and the Trade in Services Agreement.}, keywords = {frontpage, Grondrechten, Privacy}, }

Survey and data gathering to support the Impact Assessment of a possible new legislative proposal concerning Directive 2010/13/EU (AVMSD) and in particular the provisions on media freedom, public interest and access for disabled people external link

2016

Abstract

The current EU rules on the independence of audiovisual media regulators (Article 30 AVMSD) have little to no impact on the actual performance of regulators, which are under the discretion of MS. […] [E]stablishment of concrete requirements have the largest potential for <em>de facto </em>safeguarding independence of regulators and thus more effective transposition of the AVMSD and the preservation of free and pluralistic media.

frontpage

Bibtex

Report{nokey, title = {Survey and data gathering to support the Impact Assessment of a possible new legislative proposal concerning Directive 2010/13/EU (AVMSD) and in particular the provisions on media freedom, public interest and access for disabled people}, author = {Irion, K.}, url = {http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1798}, year = {2016}, date = {2016-06-24}, abstract = {The current EU rules on the independence of audiovisual media regulators (Article 30 AVMSD) have little to no impact on the actual performance of regulators, which are under the discretion of MS. […] [E]stablishment of concrete requirements have the largest potential for <em>de facto </em>safeguarding independence of regulators and thus more effective transposition of the AVMSD and the preservation of free and pluralistic media.}, keywords = {frontpage}, }