在制定跨大西洋数据隐私法时对“外国”的驯化

B. Petkova
{"title":"在制定跨大西洋数据隐私法时对“外国”的驯化","authors":"B. Petkova","doi":"10.1093/ICON/MOX079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research shows that in the data privacy domain, the regulation promoted by front-runner states in federated systems such as the United States or the European Union (EU) generates races to the top, not to the bottom. Institutional dynamics or the willingness of major interstate companies to work with a single standard generally creates opportunities for the federal lawmaker to level up privacy protection. This article uses federalism to explore whether a similar pattern of convergence (toward the higher regulatory standard) emerges when it comes to the international arena, or whether we witness a more nuanced picture. I focus on the interaction of the European Union with the United States, looking at the migration of legal ideas across the (member) state jurisdictions with a focus on breach notification statutes and privacy officers. The article further analyzes recent developments such as the invalidation of the Safe Harbor agreement and the adoption of a Privacy Shield. I argue that instead of a one-way street, usually conceptualized as the EU ratcheting up standards in the United States, the influences between the two blocs are mutual. Such influences are conditioned by the receptivity and ability of domestic actors in both the United States and the EU to translate, and often, adapt the “foreign” to their respective contexts. Instead of converging toward a uniform standard, the different points of entry in the two federated systems contribute to the continuous development of two models of regulating commercial privacy that, thus far, remain distinct.","PeriodicalId":179517,"journal":{"name":"Information Privacy Law eJournal","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Domesticating The ‘Foreign’ in Making Transatlantic Data Privacy Law\",\"authors\":\"B. Petkova\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ICON/MOX079\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Research shows that in the data privacy domain, the regulation promoted by front-runner states in federated systems such as the United States or the European Union (EU) generates races to the top, not to the bottom. Institutional dynamics or the willingness of major interstate companies to work with a single standard generally creates opportunities for the federal lawmaker to level up privacy protection. This article uses federalism to explore whether a similar pattern of convergence (toward the higher regulatory standard) emerges when it comes to the international arena, or whether we witness a more nuanced picture. I focus on the interaction of the European Union with the United States, looking at the migration of legal ideas across the (member) state jurisdictions with a focus on breach notification statutes and privacy officers. The article further analyzes recent developments such as the invalidation of the Safe Harbor agreement and the adoption of a Privacy Shield. I argue that instead of a one-way street, usually conceptualized as the EU ratcheting up standards in the United States, the influences between the two blocs are mutual. Such influences are conditioned by the receptivity and ability of domestic actors in both the United States and the EU to translate, and often, adapt the “foreign” to their respective contexts. Instead of converging toward a uniform standard, the different points of entry in the two federated systems contribute to the continuous development of two models of regulating commercial privacy that, thus far, remain distinct.\",\"PeriodicalId\":179517,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Information Privacy Law eJournal\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-02-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Information Privacy Law eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ICON/MOX079\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Information Privacy Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ICON/MOX079","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究表明,在数据隐私领域,美国或欧盟(EU)等联邦系统中领先的国家所推动的监管产生的是向上的竞争,而不是向下的竞争。制度动态或主要州际公司采用单一标准的意愿通常为联邦立法者提供了提高隐私保护水平的机会。本文使用联邦制来探讨,当涉及到国际舞台时,是否会出现类似的趋同模式(朝着更高的监管标准),或者我们是否会看到一个更微妙的画面。我专注于欧盟与美国的互动,着眼于跨(成员)国家司法管辖区的法律思想的迁移,重点关注违规通知法规和隐私官员。文章进一步分析了最近的事态发展,如安全港协议的失效和隐私盾的采用。我认为,欧盟和美国之间的影响是相互的,而不是单向的,通常被概念为欧盟提高美国的标准。这种影响取决于美国和欧盟的国内行动者的接受能力和翻译能力,并经常使"外国"适应各自的背景。这两个联邦系统的不同切入点并没有趋同于统一的标准,而是促成了两种监管商业隐私的模式的不断发展,到目前为止,这两种模式仍然是截然不同的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Domesticating The ‘Foreign’ in Making Transatlantic Data Privacy Law
Research shows that in the data privacy domain, the regulation promoted by front-runner states in federated systems such as the United States or the European Union (EU) generates races to the top, not to the bottom. Institutional dynamics or the willingness of major interstate companies to work with a single standard generally creates opportunities for the federal lawmaker to level up privacy protection. This article uses federalism to explore whether a similar pattern of convergence (toward the higher regulatory standard) emerges when it comes to the international arena, or whether we witness a more nuanced picture. I focus on the interaction of the European Union with the United States, looking at the migration of legal ideas across the (member) state jurisdictions with a focus on breach notification statutes and privacy officers. The article further analyzes recent developments such as the invalidation of the Safe Harbor agreement and the adoption of a Privacy Shield. I argue that instead of a one-way street, usually conceptualized as the EU ratcheting up standards in the United States, the influences between the two blocs are mutual. Such influences are conditioned by the receptivity and ability of domestic actors in both the United States and the EU to translate, and often, adapt the “foreign” to their respective contexts. Instead of converging toward a uniform standard, the different points of entry in the two federated systems contribute to the continuous development of two models of regulating commercial privacy that, thus far, remain distinct.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Policy Responses to Cross-border Central Bank Digital Currencies – Assessing the Transborder Effects of Digital Yuan Artificial Intelligence in the Internet of Health Things: Is the Solution to AI Privacy More AI? Comments on GDPR Enforcement EDPB Decision 01/020 Privacy Rights and Data Security: GDPR and Personal Data Driven Markets Big Boss is Watching You! The Right to Privacy of Employees in the Context of Workplace Surveillance
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1