Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Privacy EU Security United States Your Rights Online

Europe Agrees To Send Airline Passenger Data To US 403

Posted by samzenpus
from the naming-names dept.
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.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Europe Agrees To Send Airline Passenger Data To US

Comments Filter:
  • Why? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Zapotek (1032314) <tasos.laskos@[ ]il.com ['gma' in gap]> on Friday April 20, 2012 @02:46AM (#39743051) Homepage
    Why comply? What would the US do, deny entrance to all EU citizens?
    Anyone care to explain this?
    • Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by polar red (215081) on Friday April 20, 2012 @02:48AM (#39743063)

      deny entrance to all EU citizens?

      this agreement has the same effect on me - I will never travel to the US.

      • Re:Why? (Score:4, Informative)

        by Little_Professor (971208) <littleprof&dodgeit,com> on Friday April 20, 2012 @04:51AM (#39743645) Journal
        This ruling shares all PNR data collected within Europe. It doesn't matter whether you are travelling to the US or to Botswana, your details have been stored and now will be handed over to the USA.
        • by Dr. Evil (3501)

          source?

          • Source is here... (Score:5, Insightful)

            by UnoriginalBoringNick (1562311) on Friday April 20, 2012 @08:36AM (#39744595)

            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
            Scope
            1.
            PNR, as set forth in the Guidelines of the International Civil Aviation Organization, shall
            mean the record created by air carriers or their authorized agents for each journey booked by or on
            behalf of any passenger and contained in carriers' reservation systems, departure control systems, or
            equivalent systems providing similar functionality (collectively referred to in this Agreement as
            "reservation systems"). Specifically, as used in this Agreement, PNR consists of the data types set
            forth in the Annex to this Agreement ("Annex").
            2.
            This Agreement shall apply to carriers operating passenger flights between the
            European Union and the United States.
            3.
            This Agreement shall also apply to carriers incorporated or storing data in the
            European Union and operating passenger flights to or from the United States.
            ARTICLE 3
            Provision of PNR
            The Parties agree that carriers shall provide PNR contained in their reservation systems to DHS as
            required by and in accordance with DHS standards and consistent with this Agreement. Should
            PNR transferred by carriers include data beyond those listed in the Annex, DHS shall delete such
            data upon receipt.

            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:

            ANNEX
            PNR Data Types
            1. PNR record locator code
            2. Date of reservation/issue of ticket
            3. Date(s) of intended travel
            4. Name(s)
            5. Available frequent flier and benefit information (i.e., free tickets, upgrades, etc.)
            6. Other names on PNR, including number of travelers on PNR
            7. All available contact information (including originator information)
            8. All available payment/billing information (not including other transaction details linked to a credit card or account and not connected to the travel transaction)
            9. Travel itinerary for specific PNR
            10. Travel agency/travel agent
            11. Code share information
            12. Split/divided information
            13. Travel status of passenger (including confirmations and check-in status)
            14. Ticketing information, including ticket number, one way tickets and Automated Ticket Fare Quote
            15. All baggage information
            16. Seat information, including seat number
            17. General remarks including OSI, SSI and SSR information
            18. Any collected APIS information
            19. All historical changes to the PNR listed under points 1 to 18

            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: (Score:3, Interesting)

              by xtracto (837672)

              Amazing stuff... So, do people still think Hugo Chavez's talk about the "arrogance and selfishness of the american imperialism" talk is crazy?

            • Re:Source is here... (Score:5, Interesting)

              by gstrickler (920733) on Friday April 20, 2012 @09:58AM (#39745291)

              I have seen nothing in the agreement that limits the data gathering to flights to / from the USA

              And that is the one reason I see to object to this. Sharing passenger data on passengers flying to/from the US makes sense. They're just going to have to provide that info to customs when the passenger arrives anyway, getting the info ahead of time is a smart security move and is not an invasion of privacy.

              However, if this provides info on passengers on flights that are not to/from the US, then it goes too far and we should object. You could make a case for providing info on previous international flights for the passengers who are on a flight to the US. For instance, someone flies from Afghanistan to London, then to US, knowing they originated in Afghanistan might be important, even if the flights were a few months apart. But even in that instance, that info should not be provided until they book a flight into the US.

      • Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Rogerborg (306625) on Friday April 20, 2012 @05:00AM (#39743695) Homepage

        I will never travel to the US

        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.

        • by Skal Tura (595728)

          Yeah quite true, but i'm going to do my best to avoid travelling by flight in future, sure a trip to central europe now will take 2-3 days one way instead of couple of hours... But atleast i get good compensation in taxes :)

        • Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by elewton (1743958) on Friday April 20, 2012 @05:53AM (#39743933)

          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)

            by jpapon (1877296) on Friday April 20, 2012 @07:56AM (#39744393) Journal
            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.
            • Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)

              by camperdave (969942) on Friday April 20, 2012 @10:05AM (#39745369) Journal

              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.

        • Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by 1s44c (552956) on Friday April 20, 2012 @05:54AM (#39743937)

          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)

          by L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) on Friday April 20, 2012 @05:55AM (#39743945)
          Hanz Ze Vacationer is me. I'll be visiting Europe, Asia, Australasia instead of the US for my holidays.

          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:5, Insightful)

            by xaxa (988988) on Friday April 20, 2012 @07:50AM (#39744375)

            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, Interesting)

          by jawtheshark (198669) * <slashdot@nosPAm.jawtheshark.com> on Friday April 20, 2012 @06:10AM (#39744019) Homepage Journal

          Oh, Hans Ze Vacationer does care, at least those who are informed a bit. When Bush was in power, I told my wife: I won't go to the US as long as Bush is in power, halfway expecting the insanity would end after is reign. It didn't. While discussing vacations recently, my wife brought up the US (We saw a really nice documentary about San Fransisco and I've been there and I'd love to take my wife) and I said "no". She didn't understand as Bush was gone, and I told her we basically have no rights at all there. Calmed her down a bit.

          Jean le Commerce is a tough nut. Yes, if he's dealing with US corporations, he probably has no choice. However, many International companies now already start to make sure conferences and meetings are done outside of the US to avoid the risk of laptops being ceized, and employees being held. That's a business risk, whether you like it or not.

          • by KGIII (973947)

            However, many International companies now already start to make sure conferences and meetings are done outside of the US to avoid the risk of laptops being ceized, and employees being held.

            What is "many" and do you have a citation for this or is it something you're assuming? I don't have a nickle invested so I'm not the least bit concerned, I'm just curious and it seems awfully hyperbolic with the rather big assumptions and weasel words.

      • Re:Why? (Score:5, Funny)

        by Fuzzums (250400) on Friday April 20, 2012 @05:33AM (#39743851) Homepage

        I think fire should be fought with fire.
        I demand blood samples and fingerprints from all Americans entering the EU.
        And a cavity search.

      • by 1s44c (552956)

        deny entrance to all EU citizens?

        this agreement has the same effect on me - I will never travel to the US.

        Nor will I which is a real shame actually as I'd love to see some of the sights or go on a shopping trip. Don't they want me spending money and supporting their economy?

    • Re:Why? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 20, 2012 @02:50AM (#39743077)

      The article says that's exactly what the US threatened. To require a visa for any European entering the US. I think if I were an EU politician, I would be inclined to threaten to do exactly the same to them. But apparently two thirds of them disagree with me. Pity.

      • Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Alioth (221270) <no@spam> on Friday April 20, 2012 @06:34AM (#39744093) Journal

        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:Why? (Score:5, Informative)

          by blind biker (1066130) on Friday April 20, 2012 @07:29AM (#39744283) Journal

          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.

          Truth! Before I got naturalized Finnish citizen, applying for a USA visa was one big, tedious and infinitely irritating procedure where one has to gather ridiculous amounts of documents, like bank statements of the last six months AND payslips AND proof of employment (just to name ONE category of documents). Then, the application fee is paid in some super-archaic way that forces one to go to the bank instead of just whipping out the credit card or doing a bank transfer using internet banking. And finally, you had to provide a special, pre-paid envelope with your application, so they can send you the passport home in that. I didn't mention some other docs one had to collect.

          A fucking quest!

          • This is NOT a US-specific process!

            This is _exactly_ the same process people need to go through to visit the Schengen countries if they need a visa. Except that for most countries, one actually has to travel to a consulate rather than being able to send the application through mail.

    • Because they get data in return. Because half the EU doesn't care at all.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      The US are paranoid and they are dragging every other country to their level. Someone somewhere has to stand up to these brow beaters . Guess it's not the European wimps.

    • Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by aaaaaaargh! (1150173) on Friday April 20, 2012 @04:47AM (#39743631)

      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. :(

      • 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.

        This is already the case. For everyone. The only thing they could do that would have any more effect on Europeans than others is to deny entry completely.

        • by torako (532270)

          As a citizen of a European country you usually do not need a visa to travel to the US for leisure for up to 90 days. You need to fill out the ESTA form, but that's not a visa.

          Getting a visa means making an appointment with a US embassy weeks in advance, standing in line for hours, having an interview with a US official, paying around 100 Euros. After that, all the ESTA stuff, fingerprinting etc. *still* applies to you.

          So no, cancelling the Visa Waiver Program for EU citizens would be a *huge* deal.

          • by Builder (103701)

            ESTA is something that you have to apply for in advance, cannot travel without and it costs money.

            HOW is it not a visa ?

    • by 1s44c (552956)

      It's likely they used the carrot not the stick.

      Most likely the US told the EU that they would check EU flight data against US lists of known and suspected terrorists.

    • Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by gweihir (88907) on Friday April 20, 2012 @07:01AM (#39744169)

      Wimpy politicians that have forgotten who they represent.

    • Re:Why? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Bender Unit 22 (216955) on Friday April 20, 2012 @07:06AM (#39744179) Journal

      Don't know, we are already sending information about all bank transactions to the US.
      A local shop in Denmark had their credit transactions cancelled by the US because they bought Cuban cigars from a company in Germany to sell in their own shop. Which is perfectly legal.

    • It's not a very long article:

      Some EU politicians alleged that their colleagues had been "held to ransom"by the US authorities, who threatened to suspend visa-free travel to the US if the deal was rejected.

    • by stewwy (687854)

      As a UK citizen I am now subject to three or possibly four sets of laws

      UK law(and it's variant if I travel to Scotland or do business there, Scots law) EU law and now US law.

      UK law is all well and good, I was born and brought up here so I have a pretty good idea of what I can and cannot do. (Scotland has roughly the same criminal law but a different civil law system I think)

      EU laws, which generally have something to do with commerce, are not too bad as to have any effect on me they have to be translated i

  • Good job! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Tastecicles (1153671) on Friday April 20, 2012 @02:49AM (#39743069)

    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)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 20, 2012 @02:56AM (#39743121)

      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.

    • You also have to make sure your flight doesn't fly close to the US or any of it's territories [including 200 miles offshore].

    • Re:Good job! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Opportunist (166417) on Friday April 20, 2012 @03:13AM (#39743213)

      Who said anything about that data being limited to flights that go to the US?

      • Re:Good job! (Score:4, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 20, 2012 @06:26AM (#39744077)

        No one. The agreement seems to apply to all carriers that fly to or from the US, and there is no mention of limiting the release of information only to US-bound flights. So if I choose my national carrier, even on a domestic flight, the US will have my data. Sweet.

        Here's the full text of the agreement: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/11/st17/st17434.en11.pdf

    • by Alwin Henseler (640539) on Friday April 20, 2012 @03:46AM (#39743371) Homepage

      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.

  • by Ultra64 (318705) on Friday April 20, 2012 @02:54AM (#39743107)

    Is this just for flights coming into the US?

    Or all flights in EU?

  • by matunos (1587263) on Friday April 20, 2012 @03:04AM (#39743155)

    ...absolutely nothing.

  • As this violates... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by w4rl5ck (531459) on Friday April 20, 2012 @03:07AM (#39743167) Homepage

    ... the German "constitution" (actually we dont have one, its called Grundgesetz, but never the less) and some public laws in Germany, I'm curious how the German government is thinking to get away with letting this pass.

    In other words: German people have a government guaranty that something like this does never happen with their data. Go one "democratic" level up, and that's gone - cant happen.

    I'm curious how far this is in line with the (interpreting of) the EU constitution (which is finally in place for a few years, but that took some kind of precaution to make sure it's vague enough here and there...).

    If the pirate party jumps on this, things will likely go crazy.

    • by Opportunist (166417) on Friday April 20, 2012 @03:20AM (#39743245)

      Same way the internet police state law (aka "Vorratsdatenspeicherung") was treated. It will be implemented and then they pray and hope it survives the Constitution Court.

    • by bkmoore (1910118)
      The German Grundgesetz as any other constitution is malleable. You can stretch it out when its convenient. In the end, the constitution isn't really worth the paper its printed on. Yes, I'm thinking about the never-ending Euro bailouts, along with all the crazy laws that America is intent on exporting.
    • by cdrnet (1582149)

      It's interesting how a lot of Germans cry out loud when the EU overrides some of their laws and make them give up a tiny bit of data privacy, while at the same time they (together with the French) try very hard to force other EU members like Austria (and also non-EU nations like Switzerland) to completely give up their *banking data* privacy.

      • by peppepz (1311345) on Friday April 20, 2012 @04:19AM (#39743517)
        This law is about creating an automated database of the movements of every single citizen to be sent to a foreign power, which is known for having little respect for foreigners, to the point of kidnapping people even inside the EU and torturing them.

        On the other hand, I can't think of a single reason why I wouldn't want the government to know how much money I have in the bank, unless it's coming from illegal activities. What could a deranged government do with that information? Make me pay taxes?

        • by El Torico (732160)

          On the other hand, I can't think of a single reason why I wouldn't want the government to know how much money I have in the bank, unless it's coming from illegal activities. What could a deranged government do with that information? Make me pay taxes?

          How about seizing your assets? It's only a matter of time before governments resort to massive confiscation in order to pay for itself. In the US it's already being done in the name of "The War on Terror" or "The War on Drugs". In Europe it's done as "Tax Enforcement".
          Soon governments will be auditing and seizing the assets of anyone who isn't powerful enough to either move their money and themselves quickly out of harm's way or use influence to redirect the terror against someone else.

  • by knarf (34928) on Friday April 20, 2012 @03:17AM (#39743239) Homepage

    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 :-)

    • Sadly, conferences do not contribute a diddly squat percentage of the US annual GDP, so your point is rather short-sighted.
  • by Rotaluclac (561178) on Friday April 20, 2012 @03:34AM (#39743317) Homepage

    Europe sends data about all financial transactions to the US. Does the US send data about all financial transactions to Europe?

    Europe sends data about all airline passengers to the US. Does the US send data about all airline passengers to Europe?

    Long ago I thought we were equal. Obviously, one of us is more equal than the other

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Savage-Rabbit (308260)

      Long ago I thought we were equal. Obviously, one of us is more equal than the other

      The degree of equality depends on the size of the stick you carry and whether or not you have a spine to make tough decisions. Our recent crops of leaders in Europe have been and still are a bunch of pussies, which has been amply demonstrated by the way they have handled all manner of crisis over the last few years starting with the how they let genocide go on for several years in the former Yugoslavia (before the Americans finally kicked them in their collective ass and forced them to solve that problem in

      • In that case you should kick France and Germany out of the Euro zone as well, since they were among the first to break the fiscal responsibility pact they wrote themselves!
        • by Rogerborg (306625)
          France and Germany are the Eurozone, and it's precisely your kind of ideological pedantry that's sent the Eurozone economy down the pan.
        • As far as Milosevic goes if the US had not intervened some sort of EU armed forces would eventually be formed. Necessity always breeds a solution. Which is probably the reason the US intervened so quickly in the first case. In fact France and the UK had already done joint military actions in the 1950s when Anthony Eden was Prime-Minister. However US-Soviet meddling during the Suez crisis promptly deflated any chance of that happening. The fact is the US and the Soviet Union wanted to wrest control from the
          • For an EU military to be formed, the EU nations with strategic weapons should have an agreement on standardized nuclear weapon systems and possibly cooperation in some platform design. This means the UK and France. Regarding conventional forces I think the Rapid Reaction Force is the wrong way of doing things. Had it been done under a different environment the layout would be quite different.
  • Your papers please (Score:5, Insightful)

    by subreality (157447) on Friday April 20, 2012 @03:35AM (#39743325)

    ... Now without paper or even needing to ask.

  • by fantomas (94850) on Friday April 20, 2012 @04:04AM (#39743465)

    Most people coming to the USA on holiday to see Mickey Mouse won't care. They really won't spend too long thinking about it, and it won't bother them too much. They trust the US government. They've already bought into the American Dream, they are coming for their holidays because they believe the USA is a wonderful place. The thing that will really bother these people will be if they feel unduly harrassed entering the country by customs etc.

    The second large group coming to the USA will be business people, and they will be pragmatic: they will put up with the hassle and the sharing of information if it wins their company business.

    I think only a small minority of people will object: those that can are sufficiently bothered and are able to take their business elsewhere (can find a US equivalent to work with) or will want to holiday elsewhere because they are unhappy with this information sharing. I don't think this is a large group of people. I suppose the important question is whether their loss to the USA is important to the well being of the USA.

    • by Cimexus (1355033) on Friday April 20, 2012 @04:20AM (#39743519)

      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: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I think you are underestimating the growing dislike for the US laws. I already stopped taking vacations in the US year ago when one of your laws restricted a friend of mine to enter your country. He had been a member of a left wing political party for a few years. Which seemed to be enough to condemn him, like your own senators and US born babies, as a terrorist. And i'm not the only one i know who will not go to the US anymore because of it's way of thinking. I can garantee your tourisme is suffering, even

    • by l3v1 (787564)
      Most people coming to the USA on holiday to see Mickey Mouse won't care

      It's not about who doesn't care at the moment.

      It's about: if things are going in this direction now, what will we have in 10-20-30 years? See, now that's what's scary

      Now, my feeling is that all this data collection can hurt much more the average traveller, than the bad guys. Think of people who fly a lot here and there (including me, lot inside the EU and quite frequently to the US), and suddenly this automated tracking system the
      • by ledow (319597) on Friday April 20, 2012 @06:37AM (#39744107) Homepage

        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

  • Well at least on the email front, I may not supply my legitimate one.
    On the other hand, all they have to do is identify me, match that the email I supplied is not my proper one and flag me

    damned if you do ...

    Screw it ... I will never go, if I have the option
  • Nothing new here? (Score:5, Informative)

    by rkww (675767) on Friday April 20, 2012 @04:55AM (#39743667)
    This is a renegotiation [europa.eu] of the July 2007 [europa.eu] agreement that the EU send passenger flight data to the US. Under the new agreement, the US 'should' share 'information about terrorism and serious transnational crime that results from the analysis of PNR data by non-EU countries' with Europol.
  • Is this all passenger data or just trips to USA? If it is just trips to the USA it is not asking for much more than you fill in on the ESTA [wikipedia.org] any way. If it is all flights, then what business of the USA is it if I fly from Leeds to London or Paris?
  • by advocate_one (662832) on Friday April 20, 2012 @06:00AM (#39743967)

    Not just those going to/from USA...

    Also, the safeguard offered to depersonalize the data isn't worth the paper it's signed on... it's electronic info... and as we all know here, it's very easy to make copies of it. The Three Letter Agencies will be having wet dreams over this data and will insist on handling it themselves, thus being able to preserve the personal data in their own databases.

COMPASS [for the CDC-6000 series] is the sort of assembler one expects from a corporation whose president codes in octal. -- J.N. Gray

Working...