On June 8, GMF hosted an event on the EU's influence on transatlantic regulation, looking specifically at the issue of data privacy.  For the discussion, GMF hosted Professor Abraham Newman of Georgetown University and Thomas Spiller, Director of Public Policy for SAS, a global private-data solutions company based in North Carolina.  The event was moderated by GMF Transatlantic Fellow Richard Salt.

Professor Newman outlined the history and circumstances of transatlantic cooperation on data privacy and how the EU had used its influence to bring about the Safe Harbor Agreement that had, hitherto, helped resolve much disagreement between the EU and U.S. on privacy issues.  Newman's argued that it was not simply the size of the markets that led the EU and the U.S. to come to the table, but the reason for the EU's success in brokering a deal that served their interests was rooted in the expertise and authority that the EU had developed in regulation of the sector. He said this experience allowed the EU to assert themselves as a globally influential player in negotiating a solution - Safe Harbor.

For some time now, that solution has been under growing threat. The explosion of data and the increased importance of profiling, for government and business needs, heavily contributed to the need for transatlantic understanding on this issue.  As we continue to globalize and the amount of personal information digitally retained increases, the issues will only become more important.  Spiller outlined the interests of business by reinforcing this point, noting that companies can offer more tailored goods and services by using any information that they can gather on their customers, ranging from what they buy to where they shop, and their credit and health history.  Innovation, he argued, is going to contribute to the ability of information to be gathered and shared, and companies are already looking to use these new technologies.

Looking at what may come next, Spiller pointed to two innovations that he saw as presenting particular challenges related to personal data privacy. Firstly, RFID (radio devices that use a small chip to capture data and are small enough to be used widely in retail goods or even embedded in people and animals) present huge potential for growth of information tracking in the coming years; with the technology already being used it retail stores. Likewise, the technology is already used in Belgium to identify stray household pets. But this also implies a greater ability, for data handlers, to link personal financial and credit data with information on specific purchases, even tracking movement and usage of the products. 

Likewise, the link between RFID and developments regarding the understanding of the human genome has huge upside potential - but also creates new headaches over data privacy. The genome project has drastically increased our ability to predict future illness and the ability of pharmaceuticals to be tailored to the individual. RFID chips may be one way of communicating the need for treatment before the individual even knows they're sick and/or storing and sharing the necessary individual DNA information that links the available medical technology to the right individual (even now, he pointed out, some medicines exist that can cure one person, yet kill another). Clearly this information may be invaluable in the right hands, but extremely dangerous to the individual if it were available without safeguards. In response to the growth of this technology, Spiller highlighted the need for a strong transatlantic agreement that effectively regulates this sector, which allows for innovation yet protects the legitimate rights of people.

How well equipped is the EU to respond to these changing demands?  It was asked whether it would be helpful to advocate for increased institutional capacity for regulation within the EU as a means to gain power and leverage in negotiating these issues internationally.  Professor Newman highlighted  that expertise in these areas is often more important than stringent rules in terms of influencing global developments; and, having a strong, coherent internal stance would help the EU project a more assertive international agenda.