Following a dispute between Austrian data protection advocate Max Schrems, it was decided that US data protection legislation was insufficient and that the agreement needed to be cancelled. A new safe ports agreement is being negotiated between the EU and the US and has been under negotiation for two years following Snowden`s revelations. Patrick Van Eecke, co-head of DLA Piper`s global data protection practice, said: „The advantage of the Safe Harbor was to act as a kind of one-stop shop that allowed personal data to be exported to the United States, regardless of country of origin, without having to obtain consent or enter into bilateral agreements. January 19, 2016 the US Chamber of Commerce, in collaboration with BUSINESSEUROPE, DIGITALEUROPE and the Information Industry Council, has published a letter to President Obama, the Presidents of the European Commission and the Council, as well as the leaders of the 28 Member States of the European Union, stressing the urgent need to reach agreement on a new data transfer mechanism and create long-term security for companies of all sizes. depend on the fluidity of data flows and the endless flow of data. Information about the Atlantic. Although these are standard agreements and, for the most part, firm agreements, it will be both a financial and administrative burden to approve them before the data is transmitted. If the U.S. tries to derail a new safe ports agreement, it is U.S. companies that want to expand beyond U.S.

borders that are likely to be affected. European companies could also see limited access to advanced cloud services, although moving to data centres in Europe will help ease the situation. Some analysts believe that the ECJ shutdown is likely to undermine new port security negotiations and will not help. On January 25, 2016, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) finally succeeded in forcing the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to publish the entire text of the EU-U.S. agreement. EPIC sued the DOJ last year after the Agency failed to respond to EPIC Freedom of Information Act`s request for the secret agreement. The Umbrella Agreement describes data transfers between EU-US law enforcement agencies and forms the basis of the Judicial Redress Act currently before Congress. EPIC criticized the legislation and recently asked the Senate to delay measures on the bill until the DOJ unblocks the umbrella agreement and the Justice Committee holds a hearing on the laws. German MEP Jan Philipp Albrecht and activist Max Schrems criticised the new ruling, as they said the Commission could take a „tour of Luxembourg“ (where the European Court of Justice is located). [27] Vera Jourova, a Member of the European Commission responsible for consumer protection, said she was convinced that an agreement could be reached by the end of February.

[28] Many Europeans have called for a mechanism for individual European citizens to file complaints about the use of their data, as well as a transparency system to ensure that the data of European citizens does not fall into the hands of the US secret services. [29] The Article 29 group acted on this request and stated that it would not be a further delay, until March 2016, to decide on the consequences of the Commission`s new proposal. [30] The European Commission`s Director of Fundamental Rights, Paul Nemitz, explained at a conference in Brussels in January how the Commission would decide on the adequacy of data protection. [31] The Economist predicts that it will be more difficult for the Court of Justice to make it more risky once the Commission has adopted a strengthened „adequacy decision“. [32] Data protection advocate Joe McNamee summed up the situation by pointing out that the Commission had announced agreements prematurely and had thus lost its right to negotiate. [33] At the same time, the first legal disputes began in Allemagn