#new EU SCCs

[michellesanches]

Data transfers based on the old EU SCC’s must be replaced before 21 March 2024

In February 2022, the UK introduced the International Data Transfer Agreement (IDTA) and the UK Addendum to the European Commission’s new standard contractual clauses (new EU SCCs). These documents, essential for data protection in the post-Brexit era, are designed to ensure that personal data transfers from the UK to countries not covered by the UK’s adequacy regulations comply with the UK…

[mostlysignssomeportents]

This day in history

One June 20, I'm live onstage in LOS ANGELES for a recording of the GO FACT YOURSELF podcast. On June 21, I'm doing an ONLINE READING for the LOCUS AWARDS at 16hPT. On June 22, I'll be in OAKLAND, CA for a panel and a keynote at the LOCUS AWARDS.

#20yrsago Canadian copyfight hots up: Liberal MPs on the take from copyright industries? https://www.michaelgeist.ca/2004/06/copyright-reform-needs-a-balanced-approach/

#15yrsago Digital TV’s history in America: the DTV transition nearly cost the USA its technological freedom https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/06/dtv-era-no-broadcast

#15yrsago Hundreds of top British cops defrauded the public for millions in phony expense racket https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/jun/14/expenses-fraud-detectives-scotland-yard

#15yrsago $134.5 BILLION worth of US bonds seized from smugglers at Swiss border https://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=15456&size=A

#10yrsago Atheism remains least-trusted characteristic in American politics https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2014/05/19/for-2016-hopefuls-washington-experience-could-do-more-harm-than-good/

#10yrsago Canadian Supreme Court’s landmark privacy ruling https://www.michaelgeist.ca/2014/06/scc-spencer-decision/

#10yrsago Court finds full-book scanning is fair use https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/06/another-fair-use-victory-book-scanning-hathitrust

#10yrsago Not selling out: Teens live in commercial online spaces because that’s their only option https://medium.com/message/selling-out-is-meaningless-3450a5bc98d2

#5yrsago Porno copyright troll sentenced to 14 years: “a wrecking ball to trust in the administration of justice” https://torrentfreak.com/copyright-troll-lawyer-sentenced-to-14-years-in-prison-190614/

#5yrsago Ukrainian oligarchs accused of laundering $470b, buying up much of Cleveland https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/how-kolomoisky-does-business-in-the-united-states/

#5yrsago Empirical review of privacy policies reveals that they are “incomprehensible” drivel https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/06/12/opinion/facebook-google-privacy-policies.html

#5yrsago Beyond lockpicking: learn about the class-breaks for doors, locks, hinges and other physical security measures https://memex.craphound.com/2019/06/14/beyond-lockpicking-learn-about-the-class-breaks-for-doors-locks-hinges-and-other-physical-security-measures/

#5yrsago Hong Kong’s #612strike uprising is alive to surveillance threats, but its countermeasures are woefully inadequate https://www.securityweek.com/surveillance-savvy-hong-kong-protesters-go-digitally-dark/

#5yrago Reverse mortgages: subprime’s “stealth aftershock” that is costing elderly African-Americans their family homes https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/investigations/2019/06/11/seniors-face-foreclosure-retirement-after-failed-reverse-mortgage/1329043001/

#5yrsago Maine’s new ISP privacy law has both California and New York beat https://thehill.com/policy/technology/447824-maine-shakes-up-debate-with-tough-internet-privacy-law/

#1yrago How Amazon transformed the EU into a planned economy https://pluralistic.net/2023/06/14/flywheel-shyster-and-flywheel/#unfulfilled-by-amazon

[david843346]

Coil Winding Machine Market Global Demand Analysis & Opportunity Outlook 2036

Research Nester’s recent market research analysis on “Coil Winding Machine Market: Global Demand Analysis & Opportunity Outlook 2036” delivers a detailed competitors analysis and a detailed overview of the global coil winding machine market in terms of market segmentation by operation, spindle number, machine type, end user, and by region.

Various Application of Coil Winding Machine to Promote Global Market Share of Coil Winding Machine

The global coil winding machine market is estimated to grow majorly on account of the higher adaptability of coil winding machines in various sectors, such as telecommunication, industrial, construction, aerospace, automotive, medical and others. Furthermore, the booming industrialization and emergence of the e-commerce sector, have increased the demand for consumer electronics. Therefore, to meet the demand for high production volume, the coil winding machines offer higher speed and automation

Besides this, with the advancement of technology, the need for smaller electrical devices has become crucial, slimmer phones, compact watches, and compact machines are becoming increasingly popular. The miniaturization of electronic devices has increased the demand for coil winding machines, thus expanding the market growth.

Some of the major growth factors and challenges that are associated with the growth of the global coil winding machine market are:

Growth Drivers:

Surging Need for Consumer Electronics

Rising Automation in Industries

Challenges:

Coiled winding machines are used in various industries and they should be capable of handling a large variety of materials, such as insulating materials, wire gauges, and others. Some winding machines are not compatible with all the materials and developing a machine that has compatibility with a wide range of materials can be a huge challenge for the growth of the coil winding machine market. On the other hand, while automation is a crucial driver, combining coil winding machines with current production procedures and systems of automation can be difficult and is a big impediment to market growth.

Request Report Sample@

Based on machine type, the global coil winding machine market is segmented into transformer, armature, and CNC linear/ toroidal. The transformer segment is to garner the highest revenue by the end of 2036 by growing at a significant CAGR over the forecast period. The rising deployment of new power grid lines and higher deployment of new solar and wind power plants has increased the demand for transformers and inductors.

By region, the market in Europe, amongst the market in all the other regions, is projected to hold a notable share by the end of 2036. The growth of the market in the region can be attributed majorly to the higher development of smart technologies and smart cities. Smart urban technologies have the potential to make a major difference in the long-term development of European cities. Around 75% of the EU population lives in cities, a number that is expanding as the global urbanization trend continues. The European Commission launched the European Innovation Partnership on Smart Cities and Communities (EIP SCC), which developed a smart cities stakeholder forum. Among other deliverables, an initiative of 110 cities and 93 industry partners developed inside the EIP SCC action cluster on Integrated Infrastructures and Processes.

This report also provides the existing competitive scenario of some of the key players of the global coil winding machine market which includes company profiling of Bestec CO., Ltd., Whitelegg Machines, Gorman Machine Corp., Micro Tool and Machines Ltd., Metar Machines, Shining Sun Enterprise, Wellyang Electronic Technology, B.M.P. & Equipment, BR Technologies, and Rieter Holding Ltd.

Access our detailed report at: https://www.researchnester.com/reports/coil-winding-machines-market/5234 

[pankajbanerjee-official]

Tis better to react Wild and loud than to repent in silence against Stone

The beasts continue to stay free in the Wild posing challenges to humankind.

Prohibited allergens in perfumes can pose health threats to individuals who are sensitive or allergic to those substances. Exposure to these allergens through perfumes can lead to skin irritations, respiratory problems, headaches, and in severe cases, allergic reactions like hives or anaphylaxis. Common prohibited allergens include ingredients like certain fragrances, preservatives, and natural extracts. It's essential to check ingredient labels and opt for hypoallergenic or fragrance-free options if you have allergies or sensitivities.

Lilial, also known as Butylphenyl Methylpropional, is a fragrance ingredient that has been associated with potential health concerns. Studies have suggested that Lilial can cause skin sensitization and allergic reactions in some individuals. Due to these potential risks, some regulatory bodies and organizations have restricted or prohibited the use of Lilial in cosmetics and perfumes.

If Lilial is used in perfumes, it could pose a health threat to people who are sensitive or allergic to this ingredient. Contact with Lilial-containing perfumes could lead to skin irritations, itching, redness, and in some cases, more severe allergic reactions. It's important to be cautious and informed about the ingredients in perfumes, especially if you have a history of skin sensitivities or allergies.

To mitigate the risks, individuals with sensitivities should carefully read perfume labels and choose products that are Lilial-free or labeled as hypoallergenic. Additionally, conducting patch tests before using a new perfume can help determine if you might react negatively to any of its ingredients, including Lilial.

Same is the category called Lyral. Lyral, also known as Hydroxyisohexyl 3-Cyclohexene Carboxaldehyde, is a commonly used fragrance ingredient in perfumes and cosmetic products. However, it has been associated with skin sensitization and allergic reactions in some individuals. The hazards of perfumes containing Lyral include the potential to trigger contact dermatitis or other allergic responses in sensitive individuals. It's essential to be cautious when using products containing Lyral, especially if you have a history of skin allergies or sensitivities. Always perform a patch test before using a new perfume to reduce the risk of adverse reactions.

Yes, that's correct. In 2019, the European Union's Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) recommended banning Lyral due to its potential to cause skin allergies and sensitization. As a result, the use of Lyral in cosmetic products was prohibited in the EU starting from August 23, 2021. This decision was based on the understanding that Lyral can cause allergic reactions in some individuals, and the EU took this step to protect the health and safety of consumers.

However some Domestic brands and makers continue to use it due to low consumers' awareness of health hazards and unwarranted consequences.

Time to act and act sensible. Tis better to react than to repent.

#besensible #bespoke #beproactive

[nbmsports]

What is it and why it matters

The Privacy Shield Framework logo is displayed on a smartphone screen.Pavlo Gonchar | Sopa Images | Lightrocket | Getty ImagesBusinesses can continue transferring data from the European Union to the U.S. as normal after the two superpowers this week agreed a landmark data-sharing pact.The framework, which replaces a previous agreement that was invalidated in 2020, is a major development with implications for U.S. tech giants, which rely on the pact to transfer data on their European users back to America.Without it in place, these companies faced the risk of costly initiatives to process and store user data locally — or withdraw their business from the bloc altogether. So the agreement of the new rules will provide some relief to Meta and other U.S. companies which share gargantuan amounts of user data around the world.However, the rules already face the threat of legal challenges from privacy activists, who are unhappy with the level of protection the measures offer European citizens. They say it isn't that different from an earlier framework called Privacy Shield.CNBC runs through all you need to know about the new EU-U.S. privacy framework, why it matters, and its chances of success.

What's the new EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework?

The new data-sharing pact, called the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework, aims to ensure that data can flow safely between the EU and U.S., without having to put in place additional data protection safeguards.In a statement Monday, EU executive body the European Commission said it concluded that U.S. data protection laws offer an "adequate level of protection" for European citizens, and introduced new safeguards limiting access to EU data by U.S. intelligence services to only what is "necessary and proportionate."A new Data Protection Review Court will be established for Europeans to issue privacy complaints. It will have powers to order firms to delete users' data if it finds the information collected was in breach of the new safeguards.

Why was a new data transfer agreement needed?

The Data Privacy Framework replaces a prior agreement, called Privacy Shield, which allowed companies to share data on Europeans to the U.S. for storage and processing locally in their domestic data centers.This was struck down in July 2020, when the European Court of Justice, the EU's top court, sided with Austrian privacy campaigner Max Schrems, who alleged U.S. law did not offer sufficient protection against surveillance by public authorities.Schrems said that revelations from NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden about U.S. surveillance meant that American data protection standards couldn't be trusted.He raised a complaint against the social network Facebook which, like many other firms, was transferring his and other user data to the States, as well as the Irish Data Protection Commission, which is Facebook's main regulatory authority when it comes to data privacy in Europe.It reached the European Court of Justice, which in 2015 ruled that the then Safe Harbour Agreement, a previous mechanism for allowing European users' data to be moved to the U.S., was not valid and did not adequately protect European citizens.

It was replaced with the Privacy Shield, however, this was subsequently scrapped too.In the meantime, companies have relied on separate mechanisms known as Standard Contractual Clauses to ensure they can still move data across the Atlantic.These tools, too, are under threat.The Irish DPC in May ruled that Meta's use of SCCs for transfers of personal data to the U.S. is in breach of the EU's General Data Protection Regulation. The U.S. tech giant was fined a record $1.3 billion.

Why does it matter?

Multinational companies operate in various jurisdictions, and they need to move data on their customers across borders in a way that's both secure and complies with data protection regulations.U.S. tech giants share data on their European users back home all the time. It's part and parcel of the internet being an open, interconnected platform.But the way data is handled by these tech companies has come under heavy scrutiny by regulators and privacy campaigners.Meta, Google, Amazon and others collect huge amounts of data on their users, which they use to inform their content recommendation algorithms and personalize ads.There have also been countless examples of scandals surrounding the misuse of people's data by tech firms — not least Meta's improper sharing of data with Cambridge Analytica, the controversial political consulting firm.Europe has tough regulations when it comes to processing internet users' data.In 2018, the General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, came into force introducing tough requirements for organizations to ensure they handle user data safely and securely. This is a law that applies across all the countries within the EU.The U.S., on the other hand, does not have a singular federal data protection law in place that covers the privacy of all types of data.Instead, individual U.S. states have come up with their own respective regulations for data privacy, with California leading the charge."There has been intense regulatory and political scrutiny on EU-U.S. data transfers, so there are notable differences in the U.S. law protections implemented to support the new framework," Holger Lutz, partner at law firm Clifford Chance, told CNBC via email."Changes to U.S. law have been made in parallel to enhance protections for EU personal data and rights for EU citizens in connection with that data. Those protections are not limited to the new framework – they also protect EU-U.S. personal data transfers outside the framework, and can be taken into account when making such transfers based on other legal instruments such as the EU standard contractual clauses."

Will it succeed?

The approval of a new data privacy framework means that businesses will now have certainty over how they can process data across borders going forward.Had there not been an agreement, some companies may have been forced to close their operations in Europe. Indeed, Meta warned this was a risk in February 2022.Still, obstacles lie ahead.Schrems, the Austrian privacy activist who helped bring down Privacy Shield, has already said he plans to launch a legal challenge to rip up the new data-sharing pact.

In a statement, Schrems said his law firm Noyb has "various options for a challenge already in the drawer.""We currently expect this to be back at the Court of Justice by the beginning of next year," Schrems said."The Court of Justice could then even suspend the new deal while it is reviewing the substance of it. For the sake of legal certainty and the rule of law we will then get an answer if the Commission's tiny improvements were enough or not."Privacy activists say the measures are not sufficient as U.S. privacy laws do not extend protections to non-U.S. citizens, meaning people in the EU don't have the same level of protection."Whether the framework is successful will be a matter of whether the European courts consider the protections for personal data in the US do enough to deliver essential equivalence to the EU protections," Lutz of Clifford Chance told CNBC."Businesses will be carefully considering these potential challenges in their scenario planning." Source link Read the full article

[gdprinpractice]

UK International Data Transfer Agreement and the Implications

On 2 February 2022, the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) submitted revisions to Parliament concerning restricted international personal data transfers. These changes, involving the international data transfer agreement (IDTA) and the UK Addendum to the European Commission's standard contractual clauses (SCCs), represent a crucial step towards facilitating compliant restricted transfers of personal data in accordance with the GDPR principles in the UK.

Background:

Following the EU referendum, the GDPR was adopted as UK law through the Data Protection Act (2018), with the relevant sections for individuals in the UK referred to as the "UK GDPR." The UK officially left the EU on 31 January 2020 and underwent a transition period until 31 December 2020.

In order to ensure GDPR compliance, during the transition period, the ICO permitted temporary reliance on the EU provisions, namely the EU SCCs, for restricted transfers of personal data outside the UK. Subsequently, in June 2021, the EU introduced updated SCCs, which have been adopted by numerous organisations.

However, these revised SCCs were not directly integrated into the UK GDPR. Instead, the ICO devised its own framework for personal data transfers, which includes an assessment mechanism to ascertain whether the recipient country (referred to as the "data importer") provides an adequate level of protection for individuals' rights concerning their personal data in a third country that is neither the UK nor an EU Member State.

Reason for the Changes:

On 16 July 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued a ruling known as Schrems II, which assessed the adequacy of previous safeguards for personal data transfers to the United States and other third countries outside the EU, including the EU-US Privacy Shield and the previous EU SCCs. As a result, the Privacy Shield was deemed unlawful, and the EU SCCs were swiftly updated with supplementary arrangements. This ruling compelled organizations in the UK and EU to carefully consider their arrangements for making restricted transfers, not only to the USA but to any third country lacking an adequacy decision.

According to the ICO, a transfer is considered restricted if:

The personal data being transferred is subject to the UK GDPR.

The data exporter is transmitting or providing access to the data to a data receiver/importer not subject to the UK GDPR.

The importer is a separate organization or individual, including another organization within the same corporate group.

What's Changing:

Starting from 21 September 2022, organizations processing UK personal data must use the IDTA or the UK Addendum when entering into new transfer arrangements governed by the UK GDPR. Additionally, any existing arrangements for transferring data out of the UK based on the previous EU SCCs must be replaced by 21 March 2024.

EU-based organizations must transition their data transfer arrangements to the new EU SCCs by 27 December 2022, which is a shorter timeframe.

It is important to note that the IDTA and UK Addendum are solely intended to legitimise restricted international transfers and do not include the controller-to-processor clauses defined in the UK GDPR and EU GDPR Article 28. These clauses must be incorporated into a separate commercial agreement or contract governing the processing, as referenced within the IDTA.

Implications and Next Steps:

Review and update intracompany agreements: Any transfer agreements within your organisation, such as those between UK and US entities, should be reviewed and revised to utilise either the IDTA or the new (2021) EU SCCs and UK Addendum.

Conduct or review personal data transfer risk assessments: Evaluate any existing or potential new restricted transfers by conducting transfer risk assessments (TRAs).

Review data sharing agreements with suppliers: Assess agreements with suppliers to determine if SCCs are already included or should be incorporated into data sharing agreements. If necessary, update the agreements to include either the IDTA or the new EU SCCs and UK Addendum.

Implement a policy for law enforcement requests: Develop a policy on how your organisation (or suppliers) will respond to requests for the disclosure of personal data from jurisdictions where law enforcement can issue subpoenas or warrants.

If you’re looking for support in achieving compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation and then maintaining it, GDPR consultants can provide you with a range of services.

[hkmagicure]

Cervical Cancer Immunotherapy! Anti-PD-L1 therapy Libtayo (cemiplimab) approved in EU for recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer

HK-Magicure -- On November 22, Regeneron announced that the European Commission (EC) approved Libtayo (cemiplimab) as monotherapy for the treatment of adult patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer and disease progression on or after platinum-based chemotherapy.

Cervical cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer death in women worldwide and is most frequently diagnosed between the ages of 35 and 44. Approximately 600,000 new cases of cervical cancer and 350,000 deaths from cervical cancer occur worldwide each year. Almost all cases are caused by human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, with approximately 80% classified as squamous cell carcinoma (SCC; arising from cells lining the external portion of the cervix) and the remainder largely adenocarcinomas (arising from glandular cells lining the internal portion of the cervix). Cervical cancer is often curable when detected early and effectively managed, but treatment options are more limited in advanced stages.

The EC approval in advanced cervical cancer is based on data from the global Phase 3 EMPOWER-Cervical 1 trial. The trial evaluated Libtayo in comparison to an investigator's choice of chemotherapy (pemetrexed, vinorelbine, topotecan, irinotecan or gemcitabine) and enrolled 608 patients across 14 countries. Patients were allowed to enroll regardless of PD-L1 expression status, with 78% of patients having SCC and 22% having adenocarcinoma or adenosquamous carcinoma.

The primary endpoint for the trial was OS, analyzed first among patients with SCC, then in the total population.

Results from the trial demonstrated that those treated with Libtayo (n=304) compared to chemotherapy (n=304) experienced significant improvements in OS, progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) including a:

In the total population, the risk of death was reduced by 31%, with a median OS of 12.0 months for Libtayo and 8.5 months for the chemotherapy arm;

In the patients with SCC, the risk of death was reduced by 27%, with a median OS of 11.1 months for Libtayo versus 8.8 months for the chemotherapy arm.

25% reduction of risk in progressive disease in the total population.

16% ORR for Libtayo, versus 6% for chemotherapy in the total population.

In addition to today's approval, Libtayo is approved in the European Union (EU) for the treatment of certain patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma (BCC), advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) and advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

About Libtayo (cemiplimab)

Libtayo is a fully human monoclonal antibody targeting the immune checkpoint receptor PD-1 on T cells and was invented using Regeneron's proprietary VelocImmune technology. By binding to PD-1, Libtayo has been shown to block cancer cells from using the PD-1 pathway to suppress T-cell activation. In the U.S. and other countries, Libtayo is indicated in certain patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma (BCC), advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) and advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), as well as in advanced cervical cancer in the EU, Canada and Brazil.

For more articles on medicines, click here: hkmagicure

Hong Kong Magicure Medical Center has long been focusing on the import and export of new drugs, special drugs and rare disease drugs in the field of oncology. Welcome to inquiry: hkmagicure@gmail.com.

[nationallawreview]

New UK IDTA and Addendum Come Into Force

New UK IDTA and Addendum Come Into Force

The new UK International Data Transfer Agreement (“IDTA”) and Addendum to the new 2021 EU Standard Contract Clauses (“New EU SCCs”) are now in force (as of the 21 March 2022), providing much needed certainty for UK organisations transferring personal data to service providers and group companies based outside of the UK/EEA. The IDTA and Addendum replace the old EU Standard Contractual Clauses…

[naavi9]

GDPR Standard Clauses to be mandated

GDPR Standard Clauses to be mandated

On 4th June 2021, the EU official journal released a document titled “Commission implementing decision (EU) 2021/914” as a guide to incorporation of new SCC draft. This is being put into practice by 27th September 2021 and all contracts between EU data exporters and Indian data importers may be subject to review. The text of the publication is available here. Some essential features of this…

[forensiceyes]

Swiss Federal Data Protection Authority Recognizes the New EU Standard Contractual Clauses as a Lawful Mechanism to Transfer Personal Data Outside of Switzerland

On August 27, 2021, the Swiss Federal Data Protection Authority announced that it recognizes the EU recently approved standard contractual clauses as a transfer mechanism to transfer Swiss personal data to non-adequate countries (see here and here).  However, the standard contractual clauses will need to be adjusted to meet the requirements of the Swiss Ordinance to the Federal Act on Data Protection (“FADP”).

The adjustments will depend on whether the transfer is subject only to the FADP or whether it is also subject to the GDPR.  The Authority provided the following overview of adjustments:

 Case 1:

Data transmission is exclusively subject to the FADP (see Ftn.: 1)

Case 2:

The data transfer is subject to both the FADP and the GDPR (see Ftn.: 2)

Option 1: The parties provide for two “separate” arrangements for data transfers under the FADP and under the GDPROption 2: The parties adopt the GDPR standard for all data transfersCompetent supervisory authority in Annex I.C under Clause 13Mandatory FDPICParallel supervision: FDPIC, insofar as the data transfer is governed by the FADP; EU authority insofar as the data transfer is governed by the GDPR (the criteria of Clause 13a for the selection of the competent authority must be observed)Applicable law for contractual claims under Clause 17Swiss law or the law of a country that allows and grants rights as a third party beneficiarySwiss law or the law of a country that allows and grants rights as a third party beneficiary for contractual claims regarding data transfer pursuant to the FADP; law of an EU member state for those according to the GDPR (free choice for Module 4)Law of an EU member state (free choice for Module 4)Place of jurisdiction for actions between the parties pursuant to Clause 18b (see Ftn.: 3)Free choiceFree choice for actions concerning data transfers pursuant to the FADP; court of an EU member state for actions concerning data transfers pursuant to the GDPR (free choice for Module 4)Courts of an EU member state (free choice for Module 4)Adjustments or additions concerning the place of jurisdiction for actions brought by data subjectsThe SCCs must be supplemented with an annex specifying that the term “member state” must not be interpreted in such a way as to exclude data subjects in Switzerland from the possibility of suing for their rights in their place of habitual residence (Switzerland) in accordance with Clause 18c.Adjustments or additions regarding references to the GDPRThe SCCs must be supplemented with an annex specifying that references to the GDPR are to be understood as references to the FADP.The SCCs must be supplemented with an annex specifying that the references to the GDPR should be understood as references to the FADP insofar as the data transfers are subject to the FADP. Supplement until the entry into force of the revFADP (see Ftn.: 4)The SCCs are to be supplemented with an annex in which it is specified that the clauses also protect the data of legal entities until the entry into force of the revised FADP.Footnotes:

1.       Conditions: GDPR does not apply (no connecting factor pursuant to Art. 3 GDPR); the data exporter is in Switzerland and the data is transferred to an unsecure third country.

2.       Conditions: GDPR applies to certain data transfers due to extraterritorial application in terms of Art. 3 GDPR; the data exporter is a controller or a processor who falls within the scope of the FADP, e.g. because they are in Switzerland, and the data is transferred to an unsecure third country.

3.       This is to be distinguished from the assertion of rights by data subjects at their place of habitual residence, cf. the following row of the table and the explanations under point 4.3.4.

4.       Expected date of entry into force: 1 January 2023.

Finally, the Swiss Federal Data Protection Authority clarified that although the old standard contractual clauses cannot be implemented in any new contracts signed after September 27, 2021, companies that executed the clauses can continue to use them until December 27, 2022, provided the transfer details remain unchanged.

Swiss Federal Data Protection Authority Recognizes the New EU Standard Contractual Clauses as a Lawful Mechanism to Transfer Personal Data Outside of Switzerland posted first on http://ronenkurzfeld.blogspot.com

[trendingph]

Why EU standard contractual clauses matter for PH companies – Newsbytes.PH If your organization has peers based in the European Union (EU) and their relationship involves the transfer of personal data originating from that region, you should take note of the new set of standard contractual clauses (SCCs) adopted last June... https://trendingph.net/why-eu-standard-contractual-clauses-matter-for-ph-companies-newsbytes-ph/?feed_id=331120&_unique_id=61174a48d2099 #clauses #companies #contractual #matter #newsbytesph #philippinenews #philippinesnews #standard #trendingph

[fumpkins]

No-deal Brexit data - should firms worry?

Image copyright Getty Images

“Take steps now to keep receiving data legally from the EU.”

That’s the message for organisations in a complete page federal government advert in the Financial Times and in other places.

It goes on to caution that after 31 October “you may need to update your contracts.”

However simply how anxious should business huge and little have to do with dealing with data in case of a no offer Brexit?

The advert informs readers to follow the step-by-step guide at gov.uk/brexit.

However when you get here there, discovering your method to the guidance about data is not simple.

I discovered that I needed to pretend to be an organisation and address an entire series of concerns prior to I was presented with the information.

So here is the essential problem. Today data can stream easily throughout the EU as long as business comply with its difficult brand-new General Data Defense Policy (GDPR).

And as the GDPR is being integrated wholesale into UK law, there should be no genuine modification after Brexit – as long as we entrust to an offer.

However if there is no offer, we will be dealt with as an external nation, requiring what is called an adequacy judgment revealing our data security requirements depend on scratch – and the European Commission has actually shown that this would not occur in a rush.

So what operate require to do? Well, sending out data to the EU will obviously be no issue due to the fact that the UK federal government has actually chosen it mores than happy with European requirements.

However if you get data – possibly a lists of names and addresses of consumers – from a business in the EU or the broader European Economic Location then you will require to do something about it.

The guidance is that you should “review your contracts and, where absent, include Standard Contractual Clauses (SCC) or other Alternative Transfer Mechanisms (ATM) to ensure that you can continue to legally receive personal data from the EU/EEA.”

Err – right. I can hear lots of small company owners gulping at that.

However the gov.uk website then sends them over to the Details Commissioner’s Workplace to discover a handy interactive tool which will enable them to exercise simply how to craft among these creative agreements.

Do not fret, the federal government website states, “for most organisations, especially SMEs, taking the required action isn’t highly costly and doesn’t always require specialist advice.”

However do not believe you can simply overlook the issue.”If you fail to act, your organisation may lose access to personal data it needs to operate.”

Huge business are most likely to have actually resolved this problem. One payments firm informed me it had actually opened a workplace in Ireland, and was preparing to inform EU consumers that their company would now be dealt with from there.

‘Overwhelming administration’

However how ready are small companies?

Ben Thompson, co-owner of a cycle shop in Fort William in Scotland, has actually checked out the gov.uk/brexit website.

When he completed the survey he discovered he dealt with 21 Brexit-associated concerns, amongst them data transfers.

“We organise cycle tours, and may for instance be getting customer data from a German travel agency,” he describes.

He now frets that he might require to figure out brand-new agreements with all of his European consumers. “My heart sank when I saw this – it’s an insurmountable pile of bureaucracy for a small business.”

Legal angle

It is all great company for legal representatives. However Alex Brown, head of the technology practice at Simmons and Simmons, prompts care about simply how major the data transfer problem is: “If I was a business exporting this would be on my list to fix – but it wouldn’t be near the top.”

He questions whether data regulators will be hurrying to penalize small companies which stop working to get the ideal agreements in location quickly.

However it is simply another concern for organisations coming to grips with Brexit unpredictability.

Make UK, the producers’ organisation, states the entire location is puzzling for countless its members trading with the EU and is getting in touch with the federal government to offer clear assistance.

A DCMS representative stated it remained in everybody’s interests that the exchange of individual data in between EU member states and the UK continued, and the federal government had actually set out methods which organisations might abide by EU data security laws.

New post published on: https://livescience.tech/2019/10/09/no-deal-brexit-data-should-firms-worry/

[salamatteo]

Applying the New SCCs - International Transfers Defined?

Applying the New SCCs – International Transfers Defined?

For almost five years, privacy professionals have been breaking their heads over what to do with international transfers of personal data originating in the European Union. The two Schrems decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) have brought some clarity – we now know that no international transfer may undermine the level of data protection offered under the EU General Data…