#2 Are the Schrems cases the end of the internet as we used to know it?

Tags: big tech EU law international data transfers

Every so often, headlines appear before our eyes saying that the end of the internet as we know it is coming. One of the occasions when its imminent death was foretold was in the Schrems case when the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union was presented as a watershed that would change the way digital companies operate. Some time has passed since the judgment – today we have the opportunity to verify that it does not look like the internet is going to change. What is the significance of the Schrems cases for the digital sector? What do they actually change and why is the issue of international data transfers so important?

Dr. Laura Drechsler, the researcher at KU Leuven, who addresses the issue of rights in international data transfers in her analyses, talks about international data transfers, presented as a game changer for big tech companies. The episode is hosted by Dr. Joanna Mazur, a DELab UW analyst and assistant professor at the UW Faculty of Management. Topics of the podcast include:
- the definition of international data transfers,
- ways of solving the difficulties of having to distinguish between personal and non-personal data,
- the economic and social importance of solutions,
- challenges faced by service users,
- the grounds for lawful data transfers,
- Schrems I and Schrems II cases,
- evaluation of current solutions.

One thing that the Court has been highlighting in both Schrem’s cases is that individuals need to have a legal remedy to access rectify or raise the personal data that has been accessed in that third country by governmental authorities. So if you take the case of the US here. They refer to data that has been accessed by US national security agencies under the very broad national security laws that they have in the US and in such a situation. The court says you need to have as an individual a legal remedy and then you need to be able to access your data so you understand what kind of data to have about you. You know to be able to rectify it if it’s wrong and you need to be able to erase it if they don’t have any reasons to keep the data about you in the first place and I think these are indeed the key rights that individuals should have in such situations. At least I don’t really see them in a new decision. They mentioned something about a legal remedy but it’s not really a remedy to get access certification or wages. It’s a legal remedy to somehow check any access to data that has happened. But if you don’t have access to the data in the first place you will not really know that.

―Dr. Laura Drechsler, KU Leuven