Alan Butler

Yeah but see that was about a *theoretical* opt-out that no one would actually use. This is way too close to useable

Panel at #CPDP2022 starting now featuring @EPICprivacy ‘a @Iwillleavenow discussing privacy in exceptional circumstances with @k_irion, @MalJayaram, @rafa_zanatta, and @patrickpenninck

Curious what folx with programming backgrounds think about this definition. See the ultimate paragraph and the example in FN 7. Opinion here: supremecourt.gov/opinions/20…

Looking forward to discussing Surveillance and Privacy in the Pandemic at the @AmULRev symposium tonight @ 5:15pm ET w/ @tiffanycli @ariezrawaldman and @ProfFerguson. See you there! youtu.be/6WjBlSdizho

Today we lost a true champion of freedom and an absolute legend. Rest in power RBG. May your dying statement be honored even by those who have no honor.

Also chicken wings vs. sandwiches which is more substantial is just

The result? SCCs are valid, but controllers and DPAs in EU must review transfers / laws in third countries to ensure adequate protection or else block transfers. Privacy Shield decision invalidated; US transfers subject to GDPR. Fin.

What does this mean for the US? Well neither Section 702 of FISA, nor EO 12333, nor PPD-28 provide the necessary minimum safeguards. Those authorities are not limited to what is strictly necessary. They are overbroad. They also don't provide any effective remedies.

These limitations must be proportional and apply only so far as is strictly necessary. The law that interferes with Charter rights "must lay down in clear and precise rules" the scope and application and must impose "minimum safeguards" to protect against abuse.

This is groundbreaking and worth breaking down in more detail. The Charter of Fundamental Rights provides that any limitations on the freedoms it recognizes must "be provided for by law and respect the essence of those rights." Scope of the limitation must be clearly defined.