Facebook denies it will pull service in Europe over data transfer ban

[steven36]

Facebook’s head of global policy has denied the tech giant could close its service to Europeans if local regulators order it to suspend data transfers to the US following a landmark Court of Justice ruling in July that has cemented the schism between US surveillance laws and EU privacy rights.

 

 

Press reports emerged this week of a Dublin court filing by Facebook, which is seeking a stay to a preliminary suspension order on its EU-US data transfers, that suggested the tech giant could pull out of the region if regulators enforce a ban against its use of a data transfer mechanism known as Standard Contractual Clauses.

 

The court filing is attached to Facebook’s application for a judicial review of a preliminary suspension order from Ireland’s Data Protection Commission earlier this month, as Facebook’s lead EU data supervisor responded to the implications of the CJEU ruling.

 

“We of course won’t [shut down in Europe] — and the reason we won’t of course is precisely because we want to continue to serve customer and small and medium sized businesses in Europe,” said Facebook VP Nick Clegg during a livestreamed EU policy debate yesterday.

 

However he also warned of “profound effects” on scores of digital businesses if a way is not found by lawmakers on both sides of the pond to resolve the legal uncertainty around US data transfers — making a pitch to politicians to come up with a new legal ‘sticking plaster’ for EU-US data transfers now that a flagship arrangement, called Privacy Shield, is dead.

 

“We have a major issue — which is that for various complex, legal, political and other reasons question marks are being raised about the current legal basis under which data transfers occur. If those legal means of data transfer are removed — not by us, but by regulators — then of course that will have a profound effect on how, not just our services, but countless other companies operate. We’re trying to avoid that.”

 

The Facebook VP was speaking during an EBS panel debate on rebooting the regional economy “towards a green, digital and resilient union” — which included the EU’s commissioner for the economy, Paolo Gentiloni, and others.

 

Discussing the Dublin legal filing, Clegg suggested that an overenthusiastic reporter “slightly overwrote” in their interpretation of the document. “We’ve taken legal action in the Dublin courts to — in a sense — to try to send a signal that this is a really big issue for the whole European economy, for all small and large companies that rely on data transfers,” he said.

 

Clegg went on to claim that while Facebook being forced to suspend data transfers from the EU to the US “would of course be very bad for Facebook” the impact of such an order “would be absolutely disastrous for the economy as a whole”.

 

“What is at stake here is quite a big issue that in the end can only be resolved politically between a continued negotiation between the US and the EU that clearly is not going to happen until there’s a new US administration in place after the transition period in the early part of next year,” he said, indicating Facebook is using Ireland’s courts to try to buy time for a political fix.

 

“We need the time and the space for the political process between the EU and the US to work out so that companies can have confidence going fwd that they’re able to transfer data going forward,” he added.

 

Clegg also sought to present Facebook’s platform as a vital component of any regional economy recovery — talking up its utility to European SMEs for reaching customers.

 

Some 25M European companies use its apps and tools, he said — impressing that the “vast majority” do so for free and further claiming activity on Facebook’s ad platform could be linked to sales of 208BN, and 3M+ jobs, per independent estimates.

 

“In terms of the economic recovery, our most important role is to continue to provide that extraordinary capacity for small businesses to do something which in the past only big businesses could do,” he said. “In the past only big businesses had the fancy marketing budgets and could take out bill boards and television and radio ads. The transformational effect of social media and Facebook in part economically speaking is that it’s levelled the playing field.”

 

Clegg went further on this point — linking the mass exploitation of Internet users’ personal data to the economic value generated by regional businesses via what he badged “personalized advertising” — aka “Facebook’s business model”.

 

“The personalized advertising model allows us to do that — allows us to level the playing field,” he claimed.

 

The tech giant’s processing of Europeans’ personal data remains under investigation on multiple fronts by EU regulators — meaning that as well as the clear threat to its US transfers Facebook’s core business model risks being unpicked by regulators if it faces enforcement action over multiple claimed data protection violations in future.

 

“I’m acutely aware that it is a business model that has plenty of criticism aimed at it and there’s a totally legitimate debate which rages in Brussels and elsewhere about how Facebook gathers, stores and monetizes data — and that is a totally legitimate and ongoing debate — but I hope people will not overlook that that business model has one ingenious benefit, amongst others, which is that it allows small businesses to operate on the same basis as big businesses in reaching their customers,” he said.

 

Never one to waste a lobbying opportunity, Clegg argued the pandemic has made this capacity “even more important” with EU populations under lockdown and fewer opportunities for businesses to engage in face to face selling.

 

Taxing times

 

The knotty issue of digital tax reform also came up during the debate.

 

Gentiloni reiterated the Commission position that it wants to see global agreement on reforming tax rules to take account of the shift to online business but he said the bloc is willing to go ahead with a European digital tax if that effort fails.

 

“We can’t remain with the model of the previous century,” he said, before going on to flesh out the challenges facing global accord on the issue. “We don’t want to be the one breaking this OECD process. To be honest, there was a lot of progress in this thing that we call ‘inclusive framework’ — more than dozens of countries working together and reaching something like an agreement on a new form of digital tax but then one single country — but a very important one — is not agreeing with this solution, is proposing a different one. But this different solution, the so called ‘Safe Harbor’, appears a little bit like an optional solution and it’s a bit difficult to conceive of an optional solution because of course you don’t pay ‘optional taxes’, I don’t think so. But we are still committed towards the end of this year to try to find this solution.

 

“My absolute preferred solution would be a global one. For many reasons — for avoiding tensions among different countries, and for facilitating for business the payment of taxes — but I want to say very clearly that we have a second best solution which is a European digital taxation because the alternative to this would be to have, as we already have in legislation, a French one, an Italian one, a Spanish one and I don’t think this is a good solution for Facebook or other companies. So we’re working for global but if global is not possible we will go European.”

 

Facebook’s Clegg said the company “will pay the taxes that are due under the rules that operate”, adding that if there is a European digital tax it will “of course” abide by it. But he too said Facebook’s preference is for a global arrangement.

 

Source

[mp68terr]

Quote

Facebook’s preference is for a global arrangement.

Global arrangement in a world with so many different legislations/laws/etc.? Or does it mean fb law or nothing?

[steven36]

14 hours ago, mp68terr said:

Global arrangement in a world with so many different legislations/laws/etc.? Or does it mean fb law or nothing?

The only difference is  instead  of  the USA and the EU  invading   your privacy only the EU  will invade  it and the EU  and Europol  do a fine job of that, so they just selling you fake privacy  that what the end of  Privacy Shield  mean. Sites in  the rest of the world  that can't  afford to store data in 2 places are just going block the EU .

 

Many already do because  of the GDPR.  Now most little sites  outside the EU is going to block  you guys. And  in the meantime the rights holders  are asking the   EU government  to stop selling stuff to  not so legal sites. So  even many of your  own sites  will  buy  non EU domains and stuff to get around it  . If the EU  want sell to them they really dont have a choice but to buy outside the EU  or cease to exist.  When  the EU  gets done the only winners will be people  in the EU who bought vpns  to get around there idiotic fake privacy laws .

 

Facebook  going to try to  find loop holes  and  if  they cant  there going  pay the taxes to invade your  privacy . So instead invading it for free like they do now they will just pay to invade it. They not doing the EU  people any favors   as far as privacy is concerned  by staying  , they just help pave  your roads  and things by paying the Government a tax to store data there .  Only big sites like them and  other Big Tech sites  that are surveillance capitalism will be able to afford  it. 

 

If you  buy the idea that   any government will protect your privacy   you will buy into any thing.  Only they want  exclusive rights  to invade it so they can  be like the US and China  and profit from  Big Tech sites  that are surveillance capitalism.

 

Next  thing you  know sites  like  Facebook  will  make the EU  people  pay  to even be a member  to pay the digital tax.  Taxes  is the whole reason  the USA revolted  against  Britain and why  we dont pay taxes to the Queen  sites like Facebook  that are USA based   if they want to bow down to the EU  should get out of the USA  . I dont like Facebook  no way i wish they would burn  if it was  not for them and  there brothers  the rest of Big tech the EU would of never made fake privacy laws . The EU want to  cry unfair competition  when  many sites in France  block the USA unless we pay  they unfair to us  because they let other countries use it for free so i use vpns ,other apps  and leechers  to get around there stupid site blocks. Now the EU goverment is going to fix  it were US  sites are going to block the EU  unless they pay . 

 

The whole time i been on the internet  even back in the rapidshare days  .Rapidshare charged money they was based in the EU  and sites like Mediafire  based in the USA  gave it for free for ad revenue . I use a adblocker so i never see ads .  And still they a bunch of  cloud providers  in the EU  that dont have a free plain  that even ban on this site. The EU dont offer nothing for free  much  that why they cant compete .  What   few  free services  the EU have  do very good in the USA  and all over  the world  and people pay to upgrade there  plains  if they want more  .So this digital tax is just  unfair to the EU  itself .

 

The UK  have ad companies  but the  problem they  had none of them much have invested  in  free services   the masses  want to use . They  only supply little sites  with ads  and Google  blocks  there ads  because they say they unfair .

[mp68terr]

Thanks @steven36 for the added info and comments.

Even if fb is used worldwide, it likely cannot find a single global arrangement that fits all countries and their different laws/regulations. Was simply saying that.

And likely cannot abuse the same loophole everywhere.

[steven36]

1 hour ago, mp68terr said:

And likely cannot abuse the same loophole everywhere.

They can't  abuse the  same ones everywhere  because the law is different but they have the best lawyers in the world  finding  the ones they can  use in every country they serve . As far as privacy  you have none  on Facebook  if your  goverment  ask for info on you  they going to hand  it over.  Europol bust counterfeit rings that be on Facebook  all the time in the EU so they work with your  goverment .Also  they handed info   over to the Vietnam Government  and caused  a bunch  of activist   to flee  Facebook they went to a open  source social media site . There ruthless  they will do what ever it takes too stay in business with each country they serve. 

 

You  should  know better The  Taliban and aq  thought  because they  did not speak English they  would go unnoticed on social media and  NSA  put  a dragnet  on it  and  many ended  up in prison  in Cuba  any many others were killed  because  they thought  people were stupid. Still to this day the USA  over there protecting those poppy fields from  the Taliban destroying  them  for Big Pharma   because the Taliban  outlawed drugs   .So the reason they a opiate  crisis  is the US military protects  the  poppy fields.

 

 

The only countries to ban access around the clock to the social networking site are China, Iran, Syria, and North Korea. However, since most North Korean residents have no access to the Internet, China and Iran are the only countries where access to Facebook is actively restricted in a wholesale manner.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_Facebook

 

The Russian founder of popular messaging app Telegram has warned that WhatsApp, the world's top messaging app, will continue to be open to surveillance after the Facebook-owned platform had to tell users that their phones could be infected with spyware.

https://www.thestar.com.my/tech/tech-news/2019/05/16/whatsapp-will-never-be-secure-russian-rival