EU Court Blocks Passenger Data Deal with U.S. 572
Reinier writes "The BBC reports that the European Court of Justice has ruled the airline data agreement with the United States is illegal. The 'agreement' required airlines to share 34 items of personal data of their passengers with American authorities at least fifteen minutes before take-off of any flight to the US. The Court of Justice examined the agreement after the European Parliament objected. A PDF of the ruling is available online."
Directive & Articles (Score:5, Informative)
Article 25 of the EU Directive [cdt.org] can be found on a number of sites and states that non-member countries may be provided with member data in the case of need. It's quite vague (standard law-talkin' guys strategy) so I could see it being read either way--entirely open ended!
Re:Sounds like it was more a concern about protect (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Sounds like it was more a concern about protect (Score:5, Informative)
Basically, the main problem of the database-war between the USA and the EU is, that the EU guarantee to its citizens certain rights concerning their data, like not having it transferred to third parties, the right to review the data about oneself and some limited rights to have the data erased. To prevent clever corporations to circumvent those regulations by shipping the data outside the EU, there's a directive that personal data can only be shipped to countries, that have similar data-protection rights (so called safe havens). As you can imagine, the USA isn't really too interested in giving its own citizens data protection rights from corporations and the gouvernement and even less on granting those rights to foreigners. Thus, no data transfer of personal data of EU-citizens to the USA.
Re:Directive & Articles (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Directive & Articles (Score:2, Informative)
that wasn't necessary (Score:1, Informative)
Since you already knew what you were going to name the child you had an extra option, but there are still plenty of mothers out there who don't know ahead of time what they're going to name the baby or sometimes even what gender it will be (suppose your ultrasound had been wrong about gender?)
If the travel agent tried to tell you that you had no other choice when you didn't want to disclose the intended name, then I'm sorry you let yourself be bullied.
Re:Dear Land of the Free (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Visas? (Score:5, Informative)
And yes, the US - like every other country - can deny anyone entry even if they have a visa. That's one of the risks of international travel.
The point however is that these regulations aren't to prevent terrorists entering the US through an airport, they're to prevent them entering through a skyscraper (think 9/11) so collecting the personal info on the ground after they land is too late.
I'm not saying I think they're effective - obviously not, they're dumb like most of the recent security measures - but the whole point is to know about the incoming passengers before they hit US airspace.
Re:what are those 34 items? (Score:5, Informative)
1. PNR record locator code
2. Date of reservation
3. Date(s) of intended travel
4. Name
5. Other names on PNR
6. Address
7. All forms of payment information
8. Billing address
9. Contact telephone numbers
10. All travel itinerary for specific PNR
11. Frequent flyer information (limited to miles flown and address(es))
12. Travel agency
13. Travel agent
14. Code share PNR information
15. Travel status of passenger
16. Split/Divided PNR information
17. Email address
18. Ticketing field information
19. General remarks
20. Ticket number
21. Seat number
22. Date of ticket issuance
23. No show history
24. Bag tag numbers
25. Go show information
26. OSI information
27. SSI/SSR information
28. Received from information
29. All historical changes to the PNR
30. Number of travelers on PNR
31. Seat information
32. One-way tickets
33. Any collected APIS information
34. ATFQ fields
Re:what are those 34 items? (Score:2, Informative)
The 12 January 2004 draft "Undertakings of the [USA] Department of Homeland Security Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP)" [statewatch.org] on transfers of airline reservations data (passenger name records, or PNR's) from the European Union to the USA, lists the following 34 items:
1. PNR record locator code
2. Date of reservation
3. Date(s) of intended travel
4. Name
5. Other names on PNR
6. Address
7. All forms of payment information
8. Billing address
9. Contact telephone numbers
10. All travel itinerary for specific PNR
11. Frequent flyer information (limited to miles flown and address(es))
12. Travel agency
13. Travel agent
15. Travel status of passenger
16. Split/Divided PNR information
17. Email address
18. Ticketing field information
19. General remarks
20. Ticket number
21. Seat number
22. Date of ticket issuance
23. No show history
24. Bag tag numbers
25. Go show information
26. OSI information
27. SSI/SSR information
28. Received from information
29. All historical changes to the PNR
30. Number of travellers on PNR
31. Seat information
32. One-way tickets
33. Any collected APIS information
34. ATFQ fields
financial aid? (Score:5, Informative)
So, the US has some credible economic threats against Europe, but withdrawal of "financial aid" isn't it. The US threat is more like "we can commit economic suicide and take you with us"; it's a threat better exercised with great care.
Re:So, has anyone ever ... (Score:5, Informative)
Halal is apparently similar, but less strict on the number of "inherently un-Halal" items (for instance, I believe Muslims can eat shellfish). I'm no expert, but I've been told that kosher is a subset of Halal - so Muslims who can't find Halal food can rely on kosher certification in a pinch. I don't think they're supposed to do that as the first option, though, which is understandable (after all, their own authorities should be the one making the call).
You can get foods which are both kosher and Halal - for instance, the My Own Meals brand (they do instant meals and MRE-esque stuff) has a good kosher certification, and at least some sort of Halal certification.
Re:So, has anyone ever ... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:what are those 34 items? (Score:4, Informative)
26. OSI information Other Supplemantary Information which does "not require action or a reply by the carrier. They are low-priority messages and are usually used for information purpose only."
27. SSI/SSR information Special Service Request
"Use SSR messages when you require an action or a reply to your request for these service items:
This obviously can include Credit Card and other information relating to connecting flights or to other passengers not even travelling to the USA.
Passport information is not mandatory for travel agents to demand, but it is often included.
So much for the exclusion of meal requests from the initial list of 39...
33. Any collected APIS information - Advanced Passenger Information System
- "passenger manifests" including name, nationality, passport number, date of birth, etc. - why are they duplicating data on two systems ?
34. ATFQ fields Automatic Ticket Fare Quote i.e. the price of the ticket and could be commercially sensitive
The SABRE system (and probably the other CRS systems) seems to have other hidden free text fields in the Passenger Name Record, which can be hidden from other airlines etc, but which are, presumably available to the US Deptment of Homeland Security
Re:Huh? (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Interesting... (Score:3, Informative)
Whatever else you might say about US immigration, I've never yet had an experience where if the "US citizen" line agents run out of work the agent superivising the line hasn't sent people from the non-US line to those agents.
It works this way (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Marshall plan to EU 2 trillion in 2005 dollars (Score:3, Informative)
>provided nearly 267 billion postwar dollars in aid to Europe -- which equals over two trillion of today's dollars.
Don't know where you got your figures from, but they're way out. The Marshall plan provided $13 billion dollars to Europe (source: http://usinfo.state.gov/ [state.gov] the equivalent of $90 billion in today's money -- a figure, incidentally, nearly 100 times smaller than the current US national debt. Moreover, the money could only be used "to buy goods from the United States, and they had to be shipped across the Atlantic on American merchant vessels" (source: the US government website again).
Incidentally, you, with your "hard earned tax dollars", now contribute 100 times less to foregn aid (0.34% of GDP, the lowest out of 22 MEDCs in the ODA survey) than to defense (3.4% of GDP) - figures taken from *before* the Iraq war.
Re:Dear Land of the Free (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Easy ! Just add consent as term of the ticket (Score:1, Informative)
*That* is the problem with the data going to the states; and ways around it already exist [export.gov], but apparently costs too much when applied to the kind of scrutiny currently levelled at US citizens.
IANAL. YMMV.
Re:that wasn't necessary (Score:2, Informative)
It's great, because we never have to wonder about the baby's gender.
Re:Huh? (Score:3, Informative)
Let me help you.
Sharing info BAD.
Only when it is done in a manner the person giving the info did not agree to and not following the current laws on sharing and retention. In Europe, people value their personnal information and the people have a right to correction and decision on those infos. This is not the case in the US => there is conflict of the laws and data should not be shared this way.
Logging all internet traffic(EU data retention acts) GOOD.
I do not agree with the law, but the law defines exactly what should be logged, how and for how long. Also, it defines who can get access to this information. Nothing of the sort exists for US data bases, that belongs to their respective companies, even if the data inside is yours.
So, no real contradiction here. The court just said: "We disagree about the way you handle personnal data and hence we will not share our data with you until we can garantee it to our standards".
Re:Translation of Qu'ran? (Score:3, Informative)
As for the present, I have an english translation of the text sitting on my desk right now, which kind of blows your theory out of the water. I'm informed you have to learn Arabic to be considered a scholar of the text, but since you also have to learn French to be a french major and German to be a German major in college, this requirement does not strike me as particularly unreasonable.
(P.S. - Any seminary worth its salt FORCES you to learn latin and greek, though I've heard some will let you slide on the Aramaic and Hebrew, but not many.)
Re:An excuse not to let the French into the US now (Score:3, Informative)
Some of them entered the US with perfectly valid travel papers. As I recall, the 9/11 Commission Report mentioned that two of them entered with obviously-forged passports, but, for some reason, the customs guys at the border decided to let it slide. Others were already known terrorists and should not have been issued visas in the first place.
You're absolutely right that all the new laws since then probably wouldn't have kept these guys out, but everyone seems to overlook the reverse of that argument: The laws already in place on Sept. 10, 2001 would have been sufficient to catch at least half of these guys - and, more likely than not, to prevent the attack entirely - if only they had been properly enforced.
I also agree that US involvement in the mideast (and, specifically, our dogmatic insistence on supporting Israel, no matter what) is the root issue and needs to be addressed if we're ever to get a true resolution to our terrorist problems.
Re:This just increases hassles for EU citizens (Score:2, Informative)
The USA does not have a particularly good track record of respecting the sovereignity of other nations.