Skip to content Skip to main menu
  • News
  • Events
  • Law Library
  • Giving
  • Alumni
  • Quicklinks

    • Academic Calendar
    • bCourses Overview
    • bCourses Link
    • Schedule of Classes
    • Academic Rules
    • View Evaluations
    • UC Berkeley Law Logo (Identity)
    • RoloLaw
    • Event, Catering and Food Policy
    • Emergency Info
    • Resource Hub for Faculty & Staff
    • COVID-19 Information

    Support

    • Remote Teaching Resources
    • Computing Support
    • Faculty Support Unit
    • Berkeley Law Events
    • Business Services
    • Faculty Services (Library)
    • Human Resources & Academic Personnel
    • Instructional Technology
    • Phones
    • Room Reservations
    • Building Services
    • Resources to Respond to Sexual Harassment
  • Quicklinks

    • Academic Calendar
    • b-Line
    • Berkeley Law Facebook
    • Financial Aid
    • Faculty Profiles
    • Schedule of Classes
    • Teaching Evaluations
    • Final Exam Review Session Schedule
    • Exams
    • Final Exam Schedule
    • CalCentral
    • COVID-19 Information
    • Event, Catering and Food Policy
    • Emergency Info
    • Resource Hub for Students

    For Students

    • Dean of Students Office
    • Academic Policies
    • Academic Skills Program
    • Student Organizations
    • Student Journals
    • Commencement
    • Bookstore
    • Wellness at Berkeley Law
    • Registrar
    • University Health Services
    • Resources to Respond to Sexual Harassment
    • Inclusive Restrooms
  • Search for People at Berkeley Law

UC Berkeley Law
    • Academics Home
    • Areas of Study
      • Criminal Justice
      • Environment and Energy
      • Human Rights
      • Social Justice and Public Interest
        • Curriculum
          • J.D. Path
          • LL.M. Path
        • Social Justice+Public Interest Community at Berkeley Law
          • Public Interest and Pro Bono Graduation
      • Business and Start-ups
        • Business Law Curriculum
        • Business Law Faculty
      • Law and Technology
        • Student Activities
        • Law and Tech Curriculum
        • Law and Tech Faculty
      • Environmental Law
      • International and Comparative Law
        • Centers, Clinics, and Programs
        • Faculty
        • Student Activities
      • Constitutional and Regulatory
      • Law and Economics
        • Faculty
        • Prospective Students
        • Visiting Scholars
        • Law and Economics Fellowship
    • J.D. Program
      • First-Year Curriculum
      • Concurrent Degree Programs
      • Combined Degree Programs
      • Berkeley-Harvard Degree Programs
    • LL.M. Programs
      • Current Academic Calendars
      • LL.M. Executive Track
        • Past LL.M. Executive Track Academic Calendars
          • 2023 LL.M. Executive Track Academic Calendar
          • 2022 LL.M. Executive Track Academic Calendar
          • 2021 LL.M. Executive Track Academic Calendar
          • 2020 LL.M. Executive Track Academic Calendar
          • 2019 LL.M. Executive Track Academic Calendar
          • 2018 LL.M. Executive Track Academic Calendar
        • LL.M. Executive Track Courses
      • LL.M. Traditional Track
        • Current Academic Calendars
      • LL.M. Courses
      • Certificates of Specialization
      • Application & Admission
        • Steps to Apply
        • Application Forms & Deadlines
        • Eligibility & Admission Standards
        • Application Checklist
        • Admissions Policies
        • Check Application Status
      • Tuition & Financial Aid
        • Cost of Attendance
        • Scholarships
        • Ways to Fund Your Studies
          • Financial Aid Checklist for LL.M./J.S.D. Students
        • FAQ Financial Aid
      • Admitted Students
        • Visas
        • Housing Resources
        • Cancellation & Refund Policies
      • Join an Event & Connect with LL.M. Staff
        • Recruiting and Informational Events
        • Visit Us!
        • Contact Us
      • Meet Our Students
        • LL.M. Thesis Track Student Profiles
      • Meet Our Partners
      • Questions? Start Here
    • Doctoral Programs
      • J.S.D. Program
        • Application & Admission
          • Steps to Apply
          • Application Form & Deadline
          • Eligibility & Admission Standards
          • Application Checklist
          • Check Application Status
        • J.S.D. Tuition & Financial Aid
          • Cost of Attendance for JSD
          • Robbins J.S.D. Fellowship
        • J.S.D. Student Profiles
          • Zehra Betul Ayranci
          • Ella Corren
          • Silvia Fregoni
          • George Lambeth Vicent
          • Sylvia Si-Wei Lu
          • Natsuda Rattamanee
          • Youngmin Seo
          • Abdullah Alkayat Alazemi ’21
          • Mehtab Khan ’21
          • Maximilien Zahnd ’21
          • Shao-Man Lee ’20
          • Alvaro Pereira ’20
        • Contact Us
      • Ph.D. Program – Jurisprudence and Social Policy (JSP)
        • Events Calendar »
    • Certificates & Honors
    • Executive Education
    • Schedule of Classes
      • One Year Curriculum Planner
      • Student Curriculum Overview
    • Current Academic Calendars
      • 2024-2025 Academic Calendar
      • 2025 LL.M. Executive Track Calendar
      • Past Academic Calendars
        • 2023-2024 Academic Calendar
        • 2022-2023 Academic Calendar
        • 2021-2022 Academic Calendar
        • 2020-2021 Academic Calendar
        • 2019-2020 Academic Calendar
        • 2018-2019 Academic Calendar
        • 2017-2018 Academic Calendar
        • 2016-2017 Academic Calendar
        • 2015-2016 Academic Calendar
        • 2014-2015 Academic Calendar
        • 2013-2014 Academic Calendar
        • 2012-2013 Academic Calendar
        • 2011-2012 Academic Calendar
        • 2010-2011 Academic Calendar
        • 2009-2010 Academic Calendar
        • 2008-2009 Academic Calendar
      • Future Academic Calendars
        • 2025-2026 Academic Calendar
    • Registrar
      • Order of the Coif and Dean’s List
      • Academic Rules
        • Supplemental Academic Rules for Traditional Track LL.M. Students
        • Academic Honor Code
        • Academic Rules Petition
        • Academic Rule 3.06 – applies to the Class of 2010 and before
        • Credit Hours
      • Registration
      • Transcripts
      • Verification of Attendance
      • Registrar’s Forms
      • Ordering a Diploma »
      • J.D. Academic Guidance
        • 3L Requirements FAQ
        • 3L Degree Worksheet
      • Registrar’s Student FAQ
      • Bar Information
        • State Bar Swearing-In Ceremony Information
          • State Bar Swearing-In Ceremony – Who’s Coming
    • Admissions Home
    • J.D. Admissions
      • Applying for the J.D. Degree
        • Ready to Apply
        • After You’ve Applied
        • Transfer & Visiting Student Applicants
        • Pre-Law Preparatory Academy
        • FAQs
      • Entering Class Profile
      • Connect with Admissions
        • Plan Your Visit
        • Virtual Engagement
        • Recruitment Events
        • Law Building Tour
        • View the Prospectus
        • Contact LL.M. Admissions
        • Contact J.S.P. Admissions
      • Meet Our Students
      • Studying at Berkeley Law
      • Living in the Bay Area
      • Concurrent & Combined Degree Programs
      • Faculty Admissions Policy
      • Financial Aid
        • Prospective and Entering Students
          • Entering Student Registration & Financial Aid Information
          • Financial Aid for International J.D. Students
          • Financial Aid for Undocumented J.D. Students
          • Legal Resident Information
        • Types of Aid
          • Scholarships
          • Loans
          • Work-Study
          • Native American Opportunity Plan
          • Financial Aid for Active Military and Veteran J.D. Students
          • Resources For Bar Related Expenses
        • How to Apply
          • Financial Aid Checklist & Timeline For Entering Students
          • Financial Aid Checklist & Timeline For Continuing Students
          • Financial Aid Checklist & Timeline For Incoming Transfer Students
        • Tuition & Fees
          • Cost of Attendance Adjustments
        • Forms
        • PDST-Increase Offset Awards (PIOAs)
        • Loan Repayment Assistance Program (LRAP)
          • LRAP Eligibility Guidelines
          • LRAP Eligibility Calculator
          • How to Apply for LRAP
          • LRAP Forms
          • Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF)
          • News & Updates
          • LRAP & PSLF Testimonials
          • LRAP FAQs
        • Satisfactory Academic Progress
        • Withdrawals and Financial Aid
        • Info Sessions & Presentations
        • Financial Literacy
        • Financial Aid – J.D. Concurrent Degree Programs
        • FAQ & Glossary
        • Requesting a Financial Aid Award for a Student
        • About Our Team
      • Outreach Partnerships
      • Admitted Students – First-Year »
      • Admitted Students – Transfer & Visitor Status »
      • For Current Berkeley Law Students
      • Admissions Policies
      • ABA Required Disclosures »
    • LL.M. Admissions
    • J.S.D. Admissions
    • Ph.D. (JSP) Admissions
    • Visiting Scholar and Visiting Student Researcher Admissions
    • Faculty & Research Home
    • Faculty Experts by Topic
    • Faculty Profiles
    • Deans Emeritus Lecturers
    • Recent Faculty Scholarship
    • Awards and Honors
    • Faculty on Social Media
    • Faculty in the News
    • Featured Research
    • Centers, Institutes & Initiatives
    • Experiential Home
    • Clinical Program
      • Apply to the Clinics
      • Death Penalty Clinic
        • About the Clinic
          • Faculty and Staff
          • Alumni
        • Clinic News
        • Projects and Cases
          • Death Penalty Clinic Amicus Curiae Briefs
          • Guess Who’s Coming to Jury Duty?: How the Failure to Collect Juror Demographic Data Contributes to Whitewashing the Jury Box
          • Whitewashing the Jury Box: How California Perpetuates the Discriminatory Exclusion of Black and Latinx Jurors
        • Information for Students
        • Resources and Publications
          • Capital Defense Internships and Jobs
        • Donate to the Clinic
      • East Bay Community Law Center
      • Environmental Law Clinic
        • About the Clinic
        • Information for Students
        • Newsletters
        • Clinic News
        • Student Voices
        • Faculty and Staff
        • Alumni
        • Donate to the Clinic
        • Lawsuit Filed Over Radioactive Waste at Hunters Point Naval Shipyard
      • Global Rights Innovation Lab Clinic
        • About Us
        • Information for Students
      • Human Rights Clinic
        • About the Clinic
          • Alumni
          • Faculty and Staff
        • Clinic News
        • Projects and Cases
          • Featured Reports and Projects
          • Accountability and Transitional Justice
          • Promoting Human Rights in the United States
          • A Rights-Based Approach to Combating Poverty: Economic, Social & Cultural Rights
          • Counter-Terrorism and Human Rights
        • Resources and Publications by Focal Area
        • Information for Students
          • Student Self-Reflection
        • Donate to the Clinic
      • Policy Advocacy Clinic
        • About Us
        • People
          • Georgia Valentine
        • Clinic News
        • Resources and Publications
        • Juvenile Fees
          • COVID-19 Action on Juvenile Fees
          • Juvenile Fee Abolition in California
        • Adult Fees
          • Ending Unjust and Ineffective Criminal Fees in California
        • Students
        • Donate to the Clinic
      • Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic
        • About
          • Faculty and Staff
          • Clinic Alumni
          • Partners
        • Clinic News
        • Our Work
        • Information for Students
        • Access Reports
      • Social Enterprise Clinic
        • About Us
        • Information for Students
        • Our Work
      • Clinical Program Annual Report
        • Annual Report Archive
      • The Brian M. Sax Prize for Excellence in Clinical Advocacy
        • Brian M. Sax
        • Recipients
    • Pro Bono Program
      • The Pro Bono Pledge
        • Definition of Pro Bono
      • Log Your Pro Bono Hours
        • Definition of Pro Bono
      • Student-Initiated Legal Services Projects (SLPS)
        • How to Apply
        • Current Student-Initiated Legal Services Projects
          • Animal Law and Advocacy
          • Arts and Innovation Representation
          • Berkeley Immigration Group
          • Berkeley Law Anti-Trafficking Project
          • Berkeley Law and Organizing Collective
          • Business Community Legal Advice Workshop
          • California Asylum Representation Clinic
          • Clean Energy Leaders In Law
          • Climate Migration & Displacement Project
          • Consumer Protection Public Policy Order
          • Contra Costa Reentry Project
          • Digital Rights Project
          • Disability Rights Project
          • Drug Policy, Education, and Decriminalization Project
          • East Bay Dreamers Project
          • Environmental Conservation Outreach
          • Family Defense Project
          • Food Justice Project
          • Foster Education Project
          • Free The Land Project
          • Gun Violence Prevention Project
          • Homelessness Service Project
          • International Human Rights Workshop
          • International Refugee Assistance Project
          • La Alianza Workers’ and Tenants’ Rights Clinic
          • Legal Automation Workshop
          • Legal Obstacles Veterans Encounter
          • Name and Gender Change Workshop
          • Native American Legal Assistance Project
          • Palestine Advocacy Legal Assistance Project
          • Police Review Project
          • Political and Election Empowerment Project
          • Post-Conviction Advocacy Project
          • Queer Justice Project
          • Reentry Advocacy Project
          • Reproductive Justice Project
          • Startup Law Initiative
          • Survivor Advocacy Project
          • Tenants’ Rights Workshop
          • Workers’ Rights Clinic
          • Youth Advocacy Project
        • How to Start a New SLP
        • Inactive Student-Initiated Legal Services Projects
          • AI Legal Workshop
          • Berkeley Abolitionist Lawyering Project
          • Berkeley Immigration Law Clinic
          • Berkeley Students in Support of Arts and Innovation
          • Civil Rights Outreach Project (CROP)
          • Community Restorative Justice Project
          • Community Defense Project
          • Juvenile Hall Outreach
          • Karuk-Berkeley Collaborative Legal
          • Local Economies and Entrepreneurship Project
          • Prisoner Advocacy Network
          • Wage Justice Clinic
          • Workers’ Rights Disability Law Clinic
      • Berkeley Law Alternative Service Trips (BLAST)
        • Current Berkeley Law Alternative Service Trips (BLAST)
          • Alaska
          • Atlanta
          • Central Valley
          • Hawai’i
          • Kentucky
          • Mississippi
          • Montana
          • U.S./Mexico Border
        • Inactive Berkeley Law Alternative Service Trips
          • Los Angeles
          • South Texas
          • Tijuana
      • Call for Necessary Engagement in Community & Timely Response (CNECT)
        • Berkeley Law Afghanistan Project
        • Current & Past CNECT Partners
          • Hub for Equity in Administrative Representation
          • Racial Justice Legal Research Bank Project
        • CNECT News
      • Independent Projects
      • Opportunities for LL.M. Students
      • Supervising Attorneys
      • Pro Bono Spotlights
        • IRAP Project
        • David Nahmias
        • Angélica César & Mackenzie Gettel
        • Skylar Cushing
        • Addie Gilson & Eli McClintock-Shapiro
        • Tori Porell, Supervising Attorney FosterEd
        • Drug Policy, Education, and Decriminalization (DECrim) Project
        • Caity Lynch, JD ’25
        • Berkeley Immigration Group SLP Supervising Attorneys
        • Family Defense Project
        • Gabby Cirelli, JD ’24
        • Brooke D’Amore Bradley, JD ’23
        • Taiya Tkachuk, ’24
        • Emily Chuah ’24
        • Malak Afaneh ’24
        • KeAndra Hollis ’24
        • Maripau Paz ’24
        • Lucero Cordova ’23
        • Bharti Tyagi ’21
        • Benji Martinez ’23
        • Will Morrow ’23
        • Stephanie Clemente ’23
        • Francesco Arreaga ’21
        • Armbien Sabillo ’21
        • Kelsey Peden ’21
        • Jennifer Sherman ‘22
        • Professor Khiara M. Bridges
        • Professor Kristen Holmquist
      • Awards
      • Law Firm Pro Bono Programs
      • New York Bar Pro Bono Requirement
      • For Public Interest & Pro Bono Providers
    • Professional Skills Program
      • Legal Research, Analysis, and Writing Program
      • Elective Skills Courses
    • Advocacy Competitions Program
      • Eligibility by Class Year
      • Internal Competitions
        • McBaine Honors Moot Court
          • 2025 McBaine Competition
          • McBaine Honors Moot Court Competition 2024 Photo Essay
          • Previous Years’ McBaine Competitions
          • Past McBaine Winners
          • McBaine — Frequently Asked Questions
          • Helpful Materials
        • Halloum Negotiation Competition (Spring)
          • Competition FAQ
          • Previous Winners
        • Halloum Business Competition (Fall)
        • Bales Trial Competition
      • External Competitions (BOA)
        • BOA Tryouts
        • Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Team
        • Moot Court Team
        • Tech & IP Team
        • Trial Team
      • Competition Videos
    • Field Placement Program
      • Testimonials
      • How to Apply
      • Judicial Externships
      • Civil Field Placements
      • Criminal Field Placements
      • Away Field Placements
        • The Hague
        • INHR Program
        • UCDC Law Program
      • For Supervisors and Host Organizations
        • BACE: Bay Area Consortium on Externships
      • Administrative Rules
      • Frequently Asked Questions
      • Field Placement Program Evaluation Database
    • Startup@BerkeleyLaw
      • Law Students
      • Entrepreneurs
        • How to Start a Startup @ Cal
        • FORM+FUND
        • Startup Law Initiative
      • Investors
    • Veterans Law Practicum
    • Ninth Circuit Practicum
    • Domestic Violence & Gender-Based Violence Practicum
      • About the Director
      • How to Apply
      • History & Impact
    • Careers Home
    • For J.D. Students
      • CDO Email Archive
      • Appointments and Drop-In Hours
      • Private Sector Careers
        • Explore Private Sector Careers
        • How to Apply to Private Sector Jobs
          • 2L Summer Private Sector Job Search
          • OCI Alternatives
      • Public Interest Careers
        • Explore Public Interest
          • Public Interest/Public Sector Employer Events & Resources
        • Find Public Interest Jobs
          • PI/PS Interviewing Resources
          • Using Interview Programs to Land Your 1L Summer Job
          • Your 2L and 3L PIPS Job Search
          • Post-Graduate Public Interest Fellowships
          • PI/PS Job Search Videos
        • Finance Your Public Interest Career
          • Summer Funding for PI/PS Internships & Judicial Externships
          • Berkeley Law Bridge and Public Interest Fellowships
      • Public Sector Careers
        • Federal Government Careers
        • State & Local Government Careers (incl. CA)
        • Careers in Policy/Politics
      • Judicial Clerkships
        • Application Instructions & Resources
        • Alumni Clerkship & Judicial Staff Directory
        • Clerkship and Interview Evaluations
        • Clerkship Yearbooks
        • Videos of Clerkship Programs
      • Judicial Externships
      • OCI Programs
      • Alternative Careers
    • For LL.M. Students
    • For Employers
      • Berkeley Law Recruiting Policies
      • Employer Resources for Virtual Internship Programs
      • Non Discrimination and Non Harassment Policies
      • Grading Policy
      • OCI Programs
      • Posting Job Listings
      • Reaching Berkeley Law J.D. Students
    • PSJD »
    • For Alumni
      • For Recent Graduate Job-Seekers
      • Enrichment Opportunities for Recent Grads
      • Executive Education
      • CDO Online Resources
      • Help the CDO
    • Careers in Law Teaching
      • Alumni Faculty Directory
      • Videos of Academic Placement Committee Programs
    • About CDO
      • CDO Staff News
    • Career Resource Library
    • Employment Outcomes
      • Employment Statistics
      • Judicial Clerkship Placement Statistics
  1. Home
  2. Articles
  3. News
  4. Groups at Odds Over Possible Privacy Provisions in U.S.–EU Trade Agreement

Groups at Odds Over Possible Privacy Provisions in U.S.–EU Trade Agreement

  • Share article on Facebook
  • Share article on Twitter
  • Share article on Bluesky
  • Share article on LinkedIn
  • Email article

By Katie W. Johnson, Bloomberg BNA

Reproduced with
permission from Privacy & Security Law Report, 12 PVLR
909 (May 27, 2013). Copyright 2013 by The Bureau of National
Affairs, Inc. (800-372-1033)  http://www.bna.com

Industry and consumer protection
groups are divided over whether a potential United States–European Union trade
agreement should address data protection.

The difference of opinion is
detailed in comments submitted to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative
(USTR) in response to an April 1 solicitation for public comments on a possible
‘‘Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership’’ (TTIP).

The USTR requested input on
‘‘relevant electronic commerce and cross-border data flow issues that should be
addressed in the negotiations.’’

The request followed up on Acting
U.S. Trade Representative Demetrios Marantis’s notification to Congress in a March letter that
President Obama intends to enter into negotiations with the European Union
because ‘‘[a]n ambitious, comprehensive, and high-standard TTIP can generate
new business and employment by significantly expanding trade and investment
opportunities in the United States and the EU.’’

Although consumer groups urged
the USTR not to address privacy and data protection issues in the U.S.–EU
agreement, industry representatives said the agreement would provide a good
opportunity to develop international consensus on standards.

Comments were due May 10.
According to the regulatory docket, the office had received 378 comments as of
May 23.

The office plans to hold a May
29–30 hearing on the TTIP proposal.

Will Context Change Negotiations?
It is ‘‘interesting that privacy is going to be looked at under the rubric of
e-commerce,’’ Paul Schwartz, University of California Berkeley School of Law
professor and co-director of the Berkeley Center for Law & Technology, told
BNA. He noted that data protection is not a separate category on which the USTR
requested comments.

The discussion about privacy will
likely ‘‘become[ ] part of a larger e-commerce
discussion’’ and thus will be a ‘‘much bigger discussion with different
regulators,’’ he explained.

Privacy ‘‘is by no means a new
issue for trade agreements,’’ Alan Charles Raul, partner at Sidley Austin LLP
in Washington, told BNA. Both the United States and the European Union
addressed data flow issues in their respective trade agreements with South
Korea, he said.

‘‘There is no question that data
protection has an impact on free trade,’’ Martin Abrams, president of the
Centre for Information Policy Leadership at Hunton
& Williams LLP, in Washington, told BNA. ‘‘The question is whether it is an
appropriate impact, whether it is acceptable to in some ways limit trade.’’

Schwartz also questioned the
impact of the TTIP on the European Commission’s proposed data protection
regulation (11 PVLR 178, 1/30/12) given that the regulation would be binding
law in the European Union.

Undermining EU Regulation Democratic
Process? ‘‘We don’t think that privacy or data flows should be included in the
negotiations,’’ Susan Grant, director of consumer protection at the Consumer
Federation of America (CFA), told BNA. ‘‘There is an important democratic
process going on in Europe right now to enact a privacy regulation and we fear
that it could be undermined by the trade negotiations, which are not a
democratic process.’’

‘‘There is no question that data
protection has an impact on free trade. The question is whether it is an
appropriate impact, whether it is acceptable to in some ways limit trade.’’
MARTIN ABRAMS, PRESIDENT,
CENTRE FOR INFORMATION POLICY
LEADERSHIP,
HUNTON & WILLIAMS LLP

Addressing privacy during the
trade negotiations is ‘‘premature’’ given the lack of a U.S. privacy framework
comparable to EU law, Grant said, adding that CFA is hoping for legislation to
implement President Obama’s proposed Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights (11 PVLR
355, 2/27/12).

‘‘The lack of an adequate privacy
protection regime in the US is a problem for cross-border trade, but the
solution is to enact sufficiently strong privacy protections here, not to
attempt to negotiate a deal that would oblige the EU to accept the patchwork of
weak sectoral laws and self-regulatory programs in the
US as an adequate basis for transatlantic data flows,’’ CFA said in its
comments on the TTIP.

The Center for Democracy &
Technology (CDT) encouraged the negotiators to ‘‘take a cautious and limited
approach to data protection and privacy’’ given that there is a ‘‘very active
democratic debate on both sides of the Atlantic’’ in this area. The agreement
should ‘‘avoid both the reality and the appearance of attempting to preempt or
bypass the regular democratic process on these issues,’’ CDT said in its comments.

The Center for Digital Democracy
(CDD) took a similar position, saying in its comments that it is ‘‘ extremely critical’’ for U.S. and EU lawmakers to address
their frameworks first. ‘‘USTR should not try to advance the interests of [the
U.S.] digital marketing industry in a manner that will ultimately challenge and
undermine the European Union’s data-protection framework.’’

The Electronic Privacy
Information Center (EPIC) echoed those concerns in its comments, adding that
‘‘trade agreements are not the appropriate mechanism for determining
international privacy standards, and thus the TTIP should exclude privacy and
data protection entirely.’’

EPIC pointed to an April
Bertelsmann Foundation and Atlantic Council survey report based on responses of
some 120 business, academic, government, legislative, and media professionals
that concluded data protection/privacy will be one of the most important and
most difficult issues to address in the negotiations, and thus ‘‘has the
potential to derail negotiations if not handled effectively.’’

CFA, CDD, EPIC, and other groups
encouraged the USTR to ensure transparent negotiations and provide
opportunities for public involvement. ‘‘For us, the process is equally as
important as the subject matter to be discussed,’’ Grant of CFA said. ‘‘[W]e
want the process to be transparent and open and we want a mechanism for
consumer representatives to actually engage in a meaningful way.’’

‘‘The fundamental point is that
neither the EU nor the US should discriminate against the other side’s
business—digital or otherwise.’’
ALAN CHARLES RAUL,
PARTNER, SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP

Avoiding
Cross-Border Data Flow Barriers.
Any U.S.-EU trade agreement should
address privacy and data protection issues because those issues ‘‘are intrinsic
to digital trade across the Atlantic,’’ Raul told BNA. Resolving ‘‘conflicts of
laws and regulatory impediments’’ is important given digital trade’s importance
in the world economy, he emphasized. For example, ‘‘many US companies and
online offerings get targeted for EU enforcement actions and extra
administrative burdens to do business for the EU,’’ he said. ‘‘This harms US
trade interests and also holds back innovation in the EU to the detriment of EU
consumers,’’ Raul emphasized.

‘‘The fundamental point is that neither
the EU nor the US should discriminate against the other side’s business—digital
or otherwise,’’ he said.

TTIP negotiators should ‘‘ensure
that privacy rules do not act as an unnecessary barrier to cross-border flows
of information,’’ the Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA)
agreed in its comments. The agreement ‘‘should reaffirm the obligation to
provide companies with a usable means to demonstrate compliance with local
privacy rules so that 
information
can flow across borders,’’ SIIA said.

‘‘While privacy and data
protection legal frameworks strive to protect the privacy of individuals and
secure their data, the ability for industry to innovate and develop new
products and services should not be impeded,’’ the Information Technology
Industry Council (ITI) said in its comments. ITI said the agreement should
contemplate accountability mechanisms that are already in place, such as
binding corporate rules (BCRs) and codes of conduct.

The U.S.-EU Safe Harbor Program
is another important mechanism to allow data to cross borders, BSA | The
Software Alliance said in its comments.

‘‘We recognize that there are
legitimate areas where exceptions to such enforceable obligations should be
permitted, including . . . privacy,’’ BSA said, cautioning, however, that
exceptions should not hinder crossborder data flows.

Opportunity to
Make Frameworks Interoperable.
‘‘The TTIP presents a
‘once-in-a-generation’ opportunity to progress the interoperability of data
privacy frameworks in a way that endures,’’ the Coalition for Privacy &
Free Trade said in its comments, adding that data privacy should be ‘‘a top
priority’’ during the negotiations. The Hogan Lovells
LLP-affiliated organization is a new coalition of companies advised by legal
experts and former U.S. officials and formed to address free trade barriers set
in place by differing data protection and privacy regimes around the world (12
PVLR 507, 3/25/13).

The group said the agreement
presents ‘‘an opportunity to lead the development of a contemporary,
reasonable, and sustainable policy framework for cross-border personal data
flows—one that will have influence around the world—while at the same time
promoting digital trade.’’ The coalition added that ‘‘the TTIP process should
recognize, respect, and seek to reconcile fundamental
differences between the US and EU privacy frameworks . . . .’’

A separate, informal coalition of
internet and technology companies—the ‘‘Digital Trade Coalition’’—said the
timing of the TTIP negotiations is ‘‘opportune’’ given the proposed EU data
protection regulation and U.S. privacy developments like the White House’s
consumer privacy white paper and the Federal Trade Commission’s 2012 consumer
privacy report (11 PVLR 590, 4/2/12).

‘‘[B]y seeking to
reconcile privacy and data protection standards—and by promoting digital
interoperability—TTIP can meaningfully reduce nontariff barriers to US
companies . . . ,’’ Raul said in comments submitted on behalf of the coalition.

‘‘TTIP can help ensure that
future privacy rules are smarter than they are today: simpler, better
coordinated, more cost-effective and efficient, and less burdensome and
discriminatory,’’ Raul said in the comments. ‘‘This will lead to more digital
trade and ecommerce without sacrificing consumer protection.’’

The Digital Trade Coalition
encouraged the USTR to seek: (1) confirmation in the TTIP of the European
Union’s proposed ‘‘one-stop-shop,’’ or ‘‘the concept of a ‘lead’ data
protection regulator for US companies doing business in the EU’’; (2) EU
judgment that the United States provides ‘‘adequate’’ privacy protection; and
(3) the establishment of a ‘‘US-EU Privacy and Data Protection Working Group,’’
which would aim ‘‘to identify and reconcile key differences in order to promote
interoperability.’’

Abrams, however, told BNA that
‘‘[a] focus on adequacy in the free trade context is misplaced. Society-to-society
discussion has already addressed U.S. adequacy through BCRs and the Safe Harbor
Program.’’ ‘‘The TTIP must acknowledge that there can be multiple approaches
that achieve a compatible regulatory outcome, particularly in areas such as
data protection and privacy,’’ the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said in its
comments.

‘‘The difficult points of
contention involve cultural differences in the treatment of access to
information,’’ Abrams said. ‘‘In the United States we have a strong First
Amendment and a tradition of allowing access to information,’’ but, he said,
‘‘[t]hat sense of open information just doesn’t translate in the European Union
in the same way.’’

‘‘This cultural gap is nothing
new,’’ Abrams said. The fundamental differences between the European Union and
the United States demonstrated by the First Amendment were a problem when the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
adopted the Guidelines on the Protection of Privacy and Transborder
Flows of Personal Data in 1980, and they were cited as a problem at the 2010
30th anniversary celebration of the guidelines, he said.

Is There a Way to Meet in the
Middle? If the TTIP ends up addressing privacy and data protection, industry
and consumer groups seemed to agree that the trade agreement should only
broadly address those topics.

The TTIP should not include
‘‘substantive domestic privacy rules,’’ the SIIA cautioned.

‘‘If privacy or data flows are
included, we would want the scope of that to be very narrow,’’ Grant of CFA
told BNA. ‘‘We are not prepared yet to say what we think the scope might be—we
don’t want them in there at all—but if they are, we will make constructive
suggestions.’’

CDT emphasized that the TTIP
should not include provisions that would diminish an individual’s privacy
rights and should not allow companies to avoid compliance with data protection
laws. ‘‘For these reasons, TTIP should steer clear of commitments concerning
the substance of data protection regimes,’’ CDT said. ‘‘The TTIP trade
negotiation process is not a suitable forum for harmonizing or otherwise making
decisions about substantive rights, rules, and protections in the area of
privacy.’’

Negotiators should, however,
discuss a process for encouraging cross-border data flows while minimizing the
impact on substantive data protection policy choices in the United States and
the European Union, CDT added, such as assuring U.S. companies that the
European Union will deem their personal data practices adequate.

‘‘To the extent that TTIP
provisions impact crossborder data flows, they should
allow governments to provide exceptions or limitations that strengthen the
protection of their citizens’ privacy,’’ EPIC said. The agreement should not
turn into ‘‘a vehicle for weakening stronger European laws,’’ the group added.

‘‘The trade process should not
necessarily be the vehicle for making detailed policy on privacy and data
protection,’’ Raul told BNA. ‘‘However, the US and EU can make important
baseline commitments to each other’’ that could be followed up in more detail.
He gave the example of a possible EU finding that the U.S. data protection
scheme is adequate.

‘‘[T]he two sides are pretty
close today, and likely to get even closer going forward,’’ Raul said. ‘‘The
trade process can help nurture and cement this growing convergence.’’

Ripe Topics for
Negotiation.
Given the context of the ongoing revision of the EU data
protection framework, there are several topics that may crop up during the TTIP
negotiations, Jim Halpert, a partner at DLA Piper’s
Washington office, told BNA, including:

  • possible
    elimination of adequacy determinations and revocation of the U.S.-EU Safe
    Harbor Program;
  • impact
    on data transfers from Europe to the United States for the purpose of
    compliance with tax reporting, anti-corruption, anti-terrorism, or money laundering
    laws;
  • regulation of producers, which would include non-EU software manufacturers and
    service providers; and
  • sanctions, which include fines of up to 2 percent ofa
    company’s worldwide gross income.

‘‘At a minimum, legal compliance
[and] Safe Harbor are going to be topics of negotiation,’’ he predicted.

05/27/2013

News

  • Transcript Magazine
    • Transcript Archive
      • Transcript Spring 2021 Online Edition
      • Transcript Fall 2020 Online Edition
      • Transcript Spring 2020 Online Edition
      • Transcript Fall 2019 Online Edition
      • Transcript Spring 2019 Online Edition
      • Transcript Fall 2018 Online Edition
      • Transcript Spring 2018 Online Edition
      • Transcript 2017 Online Edition
      • Transcript 2016 Online Edition
  • Podcasts
  • On Display
  • Media Highlights
  • News Archive
    • 2025 Archive
    • 2024 Archive
    • 2023 Archive
    • 2022 Archive
    • 2021 Archive
    • 2020 Archive
    • 2019 Archive
    • 2018 Archive
    • 2017 Archive
    • 2016 Archive
    • 2015 Archive
    • 2014 Archive
    • 2013 Archive
    • 2012 Archive
    • 2011 Archive
    • 2010 Archive
    • 2009 Archive
    • 2008 Archive
    • 2007 Archive
    • 2006 Archive
    • 2005 Archive
    • News Briefs
    • Alumni Newsletter
  • Trailblazing Women
  • Social Media
  • Communications Office
    • Media Release Form
    • UC Berkeley Law Logo (Identity)
      • Ordering Printed Supplies
  • Law School Images »
  • Twitter
  • Youtube
  • Instagram
  • Flickr
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • TikTok
  • About
  • Getting Here
  • Contact Us
  • Job Openings
  • ABA Required Disclosures
  • Feedback
  • For Employers
  • Accessibility
  • Relay 711
  • Nondiscrimination
  • Privacy Policy
  • UC Berkeley

© 2025 UC Regents, UC Berkeley School of Law, All Rights Reserved.