A "layered approach" to the extraterritoriality of data privacy laws

Svantesson, Dan Jerker B.

doi:10.1093/idpl/ipt027

Cited by 17 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…7(2) of the Brussels Ia Regulation in the eDate and Martinez ruling, a contradiction between the two does not seem likely. 60 Applied together, these two provisions [GDPR art. 79 (2) and Brussels Ia art.…”

Section: "Proceedings Against a Controller Or A Processor Shall Be Brmentioning

confidence: 99%

Judicial Jurisdiction over Internet Privacy Violations and the GDPR: a Case of ''Privacy Tourism''?

Revolidis

2017

MUJLT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses the impact of art. 79(2) of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in international litigation over online privacy violations. The first part introduces the tendency of the European legislator to treat private international law problems in the field of data protection as isolated and independent from the traditional secondary private international law acts. The second part analyses the current status quo of international jurisdiction over online privacy violations according to Regulation 1215/2012. After briefly examining the eDate and Martinez ruling (joined cases C-509/09 and C-161/10), it concludes that the Court of Justice of the European Union has stretched the jurisdictional grounds of art. 7(2) Regulation 1215/2012 too far in order to afford strong protection to data subjects. In that sense, it raises doubts on whether art. 79(2) was necessary. Following this conclusion, it tries to explore the uneasy relationship of GDPR art. 79(2) with the jurisdictional regime established under Regulation 1215/2012. Instead of an epilogue, the last part tries to make some reflections on the impact of GDPR art. 79(2) in privacy litigation cases involving non-EU parties.

show abstract

Section: "Proceedings Against a Controller Or A Processor Shall Be Brmentioning

confidence: 99%

Judicial Jurisdiction over Internet Privacy Violations and the GDPR: a Case of ''Privacy Tourism''?

Revolidis

2017

MUJLT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…424 Darüber hinaus führen die mit den Risiken extraterritorialer Regelungen verbundenen Kosten zu einer erheblichen Belastung für Unternehmen. 425 Zwar könnten Unternehmen diese Belastungen in Form höherer Preise an den Endverbraucher weitergeben; 426 charakteristisch für viele Dienste der Informationsgesellschaft ist jedoch, dass eine Entlohnung nicht in Form 2.…”

Section: Wirtschaftliche Notwendigkeitunclassified

Extraterritoriale Regelungshoheit im Datenschutzrecht

Uecker¹

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Connecticut Law Review COPPA Children's Online Privacy Protection Act DSGVO Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 27. April 2016 zum Schutz natürlicher Personen bei der Verarbeitung personenbezogener Daten, zum freien Datenverkehr und zur Aufhebung der Richtlinie 95/46/EG (Datenschutz-Grundverordnung) DSGVO-EK Datenschutz-Grundverordnung, i.d.F. Vorschlag für Verordnung des Europäischen Parlamentes und des Rates zum Schutz natürlicher Personen bei der Verarbeitung personenbezogener Daten und zum freien Datenverkehr (Datenschutz-Grundverordnung),

show abstract

“…This statement is demonstrated by the fact that data which are sent out of the country are protected by applicable law of that country even after leaving this country. The nature of data protection is thus claimed to be extraterritorial [18], [19]. "Once an EU Member State's data protection law attaches to personal information, there is no clear way to remove the applicability of the law to the data" [20].…”

Section: B Generation IImentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal issues of honeynet's generations

Sokol

2014

Proceedings of the 2014 6th International Conference on Electronics, Computers and Artificial Intelligence (ECAI)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Honeynets have now become a standard part of security measures within the organization. Their purpose is to protect critical information systems and information; this is complemented by acquisition of information about the network threats, attackers and attacks. It is very important to consider issues affecting the deployment and usage of the honeypots and honeynets. This paper discusses the legal issues of honeynets considering their generations. Paper focuses on legal issues of core elements of honeynets, especially data control, data capture and data collection. Paper also draws attention on the issues pertaining to privacy and liability. The analysis of legal issues is based on EU law and it is supplemented by a review of the research literature, related to legal aspects of honeypots and honeynets.

show abstract

A "layered approach" to the extraterritoriality of data privacy laws

Cited by 17 publications

References 0 publications

Judicial Jurisdiction over Internet Privacy Violations and the GDPR: a Case of ''Privacy Tourism''?

Judicial Jurisdiction over Internet Privacy Violations and the GDPR: a Case of ''Privacy Tourism''?

Extraterritoriale Regelungshoheit im Datenschutzrecht

Legal issues of honeynet's generations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About