Europe Agrees To Send Airline Passenger Data To US 403
Qedward writes "The European Parliament has approved the controversial data transfer agreement, the bilateral PNR (passenger name register), with the US which requires European airlines to pass on passenger information, including name, contact details, payment data, itinerary, email and phone numbers to the Department of Homeland Security. Under the new agreement, PNR data will be 'depersonalized' after six months and would be moved into a 'dormant database' after five years. However the information would still be held for a further 15 years before being fully 'anonymized.'"
Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone care to explain this?
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
deny entrance to all EU citizens?
this agreement has the same effect on me - I will never travel to the US.
Good job! (Score:5, Insightful)
Yet another reason for me not to set foot on an aircraft bound for the United States.
Seriously, you had me sold at having to remove my shoes at check-in.
Re:Good job! (Score:4, Insightful)
Hey don't think lots of us don't agree (although fewer that would be required to see a change!). Unfortunately many of us may not have the qualifications to emigrate anywhere, and additionally, many of us who have investigated have found that we'd just be trading one set of sucky rules for another slightly different set, one which we may be less adept at avoiding treading across.
Personally I'm giving it up to another 5 years, but if things haven't dramatically changed by then, there's going to be little hope of finding somewhere safe and freedom loving to move, because thanks to global treaties it's all being equalized out, such that there's no place to run, and an ever dwindling number of places to hide. (Unless y'know, you're a criminal with good connections, rich (with good connections), or just not being worth the trouble to follow (which only works until you suddenly pop up on the radar and you never know what might lead to that, a year making too much money, complaining about the wrong person, voicing the wrong opinion. Or if you're really stupid, going out and being part of a protest.)
Captcha was 'revoke', like when your civilian rights are revoked because they transfer you out of the country to 'question' you.
Re:Fuck this. Fuck EVERYTHING about this (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Fuck this. Fuck EVERYTHING about this (Score:5, Insightful)
Vore for your local Pirate Party. I've heard they're at 12% in the polls in Germany. Let's repeat that in all our European countries. EU is not a state in the US.
And by "depersonalized" and "dormant" they mean... (Score:5, Insightful)
...absolutely nothing.
Fucking LIES (Score:1, Insightful)
All data, no matter how inane, once it enters the Defense department is kept verbatim forever. Any claims of altering this information after a period of time, is a complete lie.
Re:Good job! (Score:4, Insightful)
Who said anything about that data being limited to flights that go to the US?
Re:Clarify (Score:4, Insightful)
Take a wild guess.
Hint: If there's a "worse" option in such bullshit ideas, it's the correct one.
Good news for non USA-based conference facilities (Score:5, Insightful)
This should be good news for conference facilities (hotels, etc) outside the USA, and - conversely - bad news for USA-based operations. When faced with the choice of where to locate a conference or other mass gathering of like spirits, it will be much less attractive to choose a location within the USA, simply because there will be fewer attendants willing to subject themselves to these laws. Since these laws seem to apply to USA air space as well - meaning that any flight which enters USA airspace has to have its passenger details registered with the USA authorities, even if the flight never lands in the USA - I guess Canada and Mexico are not good alternatives.
I foresee a booming business for Iceland-based conference facilities :-)
Your papers please (Score:5, Insightful)
... Now without paper or even needing to ask.
Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
the EU's stick is bigger, GNP-wise.
What routes? And why transfer data at all? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yet another reason for me not to set foot on an aircraft bound for the United States.
Might make no difference... The way I'm reading the article, it says "requires European airlines to pass on passenger information", without going into detail about whether that's US-bound flights only, flights within the EU, flights from EU to outside EU (but not US), or even any flight, from/to anywhere, done by an EU-based airline company. It would be good if someone could clear this up.
Secondly I don't see why passenger data would need to be transferred to US control at all. It's really naive to assume that the US will handle such data as agreed. Good chance it will end up in multiple databases, and possibly used at will (since under US control), in violation of agreement. What safeguards has the EU to the contrary? Any?
Of course the US wants some persons not to board an airplane, why not arrange for the US to provide that watchlist to an EU-controlled organization that checks this watchlist against passenger data? Flag & possibly take action on matches, data for people that don't set off any flags then wouldn't need to be transferred to the US (that is, other than what's done already in US-bound flights).
All this reads to me as: EU doesn't care about its citizens' privacy & lets itself be bullied by the US. Annoying - the EU is not even 1 sovereign nation, it's a whole group of sovereign nations. Combined a bigger population than the US. Our politicians should really show some more backbone.
Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Most people won't care: they love America (Score:5, Insightful)
I only "holiday" in the US because half my family is there and it's nice to see them once in a while. Of course, I always have to visit them ... they can never visit me because US employers seem to give them 30 seconds vacation time every decade or some such and they can never get off work to visit.
It does piss me off that only one entity on earth has my fingerprints - the US Government. Notwithstanding that fingerprinting is reserved only for criminals in the rest of the civilised world, not even my OWN government has mine - but that of a foreign country does? Grr.
Re:Why? (Score:3, Insightful)
But the will to wield it is lesser. Also, you might think me naive but the US acts more often in its own self-interest to the detriment of anyone else than does the EU. The EU tends to negotiate win-win agreements to a somewhat greater degree.
I suspect the EU politicians aren't quite as thoroughly bought yet but that will change. Especially if the representatives from France and Britain are anything to go by.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think they basically blackmailed the EU, threatening to require Visa for all Europeans, announcing special controls and harassment of European travelers if they EU would not comply, etc.
It is well-known European politicians have no backbone and comply to US demands any time when a tiny bit of pressure is put on them. There are numerous examples and this is just one of them. :(
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Just so we're clear, everybody who has ever said this had no intention nor need to travel to the USA anyway.
Hans Ze Vacationer doesn't care. Jean le Commerce has no choice. You can't fight this with a boycott.
Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
Not true. I have very much enjoyed visiting the U.S. and would like to go to New York again for a show next year.
At the moment, however, I would feel safer visiting China or or Cuba (where their citizens are treated poorly), than the U.S., which kidnaps and tortures foreign citizens.
The U.S. has joined Iran, North Korea etc. on my list of "Places that are too dangerous to visit right now."
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Just so we're clear, everybody who has ever said this had no intention nor need to travel to the USA anyway.
I had the intention. I travel to lots of countries to see the sights, stay in the hotels, and eat at the restaurants, Most countries value tourists as they bring in money, the US treats them like criminals. I really won't overstay my visa, I have more than enough money to support myself, and I sure as hell won't hurt or damage anyone or anything.
They don't want me there? That's a shame, I'll go to the far east and pig out on seafood instead.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Jean le Commerce can video-conference. I've had great results with Tandberg (now Cisco) teleconferencing systems in the past, and I'm willing to bet that for the cost of 3 return flights + hotels and expenses you could kit out an entire suite.
Plus, US Customs can't confiscate your laptop and detain you without probable cause because you didn't want to be x-rayed by a security guard if you never go there in the first place.
Re:Why? (Score:2, Insightful)
Maybe the problem is that the USA could still deal with the individual countries of the EU. They would not stick together, they already didn't before the Iraq war.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
I would have called their bluff. Ending visa free travel for Europeans would be a bit of a Phyrric victory, it would immediately pretty much end all tourism from Europe (causing economic damage) and most business travel to the US. The visa application is such a ballache that few people would want to bother, and would take their holidays elsewhere. Business travellers would teleconference or simply not consider doing business in the US.
Re:Most people won't care: they love America (Score:5, Insightful)
I considered emigrating to America once. Not any more. They don't need to know that information (because my own EU country barely needs to know it!) and I don't need the hassle. I crossed the whole country off my list when I was looking at countries to move to because of the shit you pushed onto the EU after 9/11 - which have had a detrimental effect on the way I travel and assumes I'm a terrorist first and a citizen last. I can't take a fucking drink for my 3-year-old on a plane because of the US enforcing policies about it, nor can I pass through with a laptop without SO MUCH extra hassle, it's hardly worth it.
Hell, my company blacklisted France because of some of their stupid requirements about laptop encryption, so by comparison the US is so far off the list we might as well forget it exists. And the ironic thing? The UK airport security specialists have been dealing with terrorists for DECADES before 9/11 and we warned the US about their stupidly lax policies for years before it and now it's just gone WAY overboard and they've MADE us have the same stupid, worthless procedures.
Tourists are big money, yes, but the biggest income the US would miss is foreign talent. Silicon Valley and similar places rely on the "dream job" of being there to appeal to everyone so they can suck in talent. By making the country appear a totalitarian state before you've even FINISHED BOOKING THE FLIGHT, the US is going to see a drop-off in immigration (of talented people who want to work there, not random joes trying to get in - the numbers might go up but the quality has dropped and will drop more now).
They're basically saying "Hey, come live the dream in our country" followed by "Please remove your shoes and see that man over there because you have a funny name and we think you're a bomber because of that and we'll harass you every time your name comes up."
You cannot live on US talent alone - not for long, anyway. And businesses *ARE* having to make exceptions for the way they do business with you. Before 9/11, people happily carried laptops across the border and didn't worry about it. Since, with all the ridiculous requirements about laptop search, seizure (without evidential status and respect for the laptop and it's contents), suspicion, etc. almost everyone that deals with you from abroad are wiping their laptops before they cross your border, or just refusing to take them at all.
Exceptions mean that it is costing you business, because those exceptions COST TIME AND MONEY. If I ran my own company, I'm not sure I'd ever send a representative to the US at all, given the visa hassle and security charade, even if I *KNEW* they had nothing suspicious. Others on this thread can provide real-world examples of this happening.
The US is slowly painting itself into a corner, which is where it will end up being left to play on its own. There is NOTHING suspicious about a UK person travelling from Kuwait, where they lived for years, to the US. Nothing at all. Unless you have some other information or inclination. But now, almost by default, that person would be marked as a terrorist and interrogated.
Your family jaunt to Disneyland isn't likely to be bothered too much by a one-off interruption. But people doing business there and in other countries regularly are going to keep being pulled to one side and asked questions. And the more time they lose to doing that, the more it costs the businesses involved, and the more they'll raise prices or bother about selling to the US in the first place.
And, as the above poster comments, what's it going to be like in 20 or 30 years times? Hell, they're already just plucking people out of the EU that are of interest to you (and things like the Julian Assange case are still fighting extradition to OTHER EU COUNTRIES on the basis that the US is trying to stick its nose in and pluck him from there instead of going through the proper channels).
The US has pushed its laws across the world. For some reason, the EU capitulates all
Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
Wimpy politicians that have forgotten who they represent.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Plus, US Customs can't confiscate your laptop and detain you without probable cause because you didn't want to be x-rayed by a security guard if you never go there in the first place.
And you won't have your balls fondled by the TSA.
I went through security in America with long hair and unusual cloths. I thought the treatment I got was unusual because of that, but it turns out it's normal.
I went for business, and spent about $5000. I'd rather that had gone to a country that values personal freedom.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Source is here... (Score:5, Insightful)
17434/11 - Agreement between the United States of America and the European Union on the use and transfer of Passenger Name Records to the United States Department of Homeland Security [europa.eu]
Article 2 Item 1 Defines PNR as being data gathered for any flight, anywhere
Article 2 Items 2 and 3 Specify that carriers who must comply are those who operate flights to the USA even if they are incorporated and store their data - in Europe
The data in the Annex - mentioned in Article 2 Item 1 and Article 3 is as follows:
I have seen nothing in the agreement that limits the data gathering to flights to / from the USA
If anyone finds wording to contradict me please reply.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
And you've joined the list of people who think hyperbole has a place in a serious discussion. Everyone was already required to provide this information before entering the US anyway. Now they just get it from the airlines.
No. Now they get it no matter where you are travelling. Flying from Paris to Rome? US gets the data. Madrid to London? Uncle Sam hears about it. Even if you never have any plans to ever visit the States, they will have a record of every flight you ever took.