Restrictions on Data Transfers and the WTO

Author:

Naef TobiasORCID

Abstract

AbstractThe WTO is not well-known for being an institution that regulates the free flow of personal data across borders. The trade agreements under the auspices of the WTO either predate or coincide with the invention and early development of the internet. When the WTO was created in 1994, its members agreed to create rules for trade in services. Tim Wu observed that as a consequence, and almost by accident, “the WTO has put itself in an oversight position for most of the national laws and practices that regulate the Internet.” Wu (Chicago J Int Law 7(1), 264, 2006). Over a quarter century later, the internet has become indispensable for trade in services, facilitating not only communication and payment between parties involved in any transaction, but also as a platform for the transmission of the services themselves, and the driving technology for the creation of new services. The first section of this chapter shows how cross-border flows of personal data (on the internet) have become intertwined with the supply of many digital services (Sect. 4.1). The second section describes how the rules of the WTO on trade in services are relevant for the regulation of cross-border flows of personal data (Sect. 4.2). These multilateral trade rules can be used as proxies to distinguish between legitimate regulatory concerns and protectionism. Regarding the regulation of cross-border flows of personal data, these rules allow for the legal assessment of the line between data protection and data protectionism. The third section of this chapter analyzes whether the EU’s fundamental rights-based regulation of data transfers interferes with the rules of the WTO on trade in services (Sect. 4.3). The fourth section assesses whether the interferences that have been identified can be justified under the relevant exceptions to the rules of the WTO on trade in services (Sect. 4.4).

Publisher

Springer International Publishing

Reference243 articles.

1. Anuradha RV (2018) Technological Neutrality: Implications for Services Commitments and the Discussions on E-Commerce. Centre for WTO Studies Working Paper. New Delhi

2. Bartels L (2015) The Chapeau of the general exceptions in the WTO GATT and GATS Agreements. A reconstruction. Am J Int Law 109(1):95–125

3. Barth S, de Jong MDT (2017) The privacy paradox – Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior – A systematic literature review. Telematics Inform 34(7):1038–1058

4. Batura O (2013) The WTO legal framework for telecommunications services and challenges of the information age. In: Hermann C, Krajewski M, Terhechte JP (eds) European yearbook of international economic law. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 201–234

5. Bennett CJ (2012) The accountability approach to privacy and data protection: assumptions and caveats. In: Guagnin D, Hempel L, Iten C et al (eds) Managing privacy through accountability. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, pp 33–48

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3