Statement of the company
If a new framework to transfer data from the other side of the Atlantic Ocean; across the Atlantic is not adopted and they will be unable to continue to rely on Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs) or depend upon other alternatives for data transfers from Europe to US.
They will likely be unable to offer numerous of their significant products and services, that includes Facebook and Instagram, in Europe said in their annual filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission by the authority giving statements on behalf of Meta
The company is being challenged by evolving rules and regulations that command whether, how, and under what scenarios they can transfer critical data to their operations, Meta said in the filing.
This includes data transfers between States in which they operate and data transmitted between their products and services. Such restrictions can hinder and influence our ability to provide our services said by Meta.
On SCCs in respect of European user data does not support compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and emphasis such transfers of user data from the European Union to the US should be suspended.
Meta expects to put a final decision on this inquiry in the first half of 2022.
The GDPR included current requisites for companies that received or processed personal data and information of citizens of the European Union which are different from those that are previously planted in the European Union.
It demands submission of personal data breaches notifications to the European Union privacy regulator, the IDPC, and includes penalties for non-compliance.
The Privacy Shield, a translocation framework that Meta depends on for data transferred from the European Union to the United States, was removed in July 2020 by the Court of Justice of the European Union.
The legal background in India
Meta had stated before the Madhya Pradesh High Court (Indore Bench) that it can’t be compelled and ordered to continuously monitor its platforms for unlawful content and that it can’t become a super-censor for billions of users who are posting billions of pieces of content on the websites every day and night.
Meta has tabled an affidavit in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea filed before the M.P. High Court against Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Twitter for allegedly displaying/hosting obscene, unregulated, uncertified, sexually explicit, legally restricted and ill content.
The PIL was filed last year through advocates Amay Bajaj and Ashi Vaidya regarding the implementation of direction upon Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Twitter to remove all such ‘Unlawful content’ from the internet and their websites as well, with immediate effect.
Challenging the maintainability of the suit before the High Court, Meta had submitted that the PIL had been rendered infructuous by the introduction of the Information Technology i.e. Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code Rules 2021 for the IT Rules, as these rules take care of one of the prayers mentioned in the PIL and by using the rule the court could direct due diligence and guidelines for social media intermediaries and regulate content.
Meta had also stated that the petitioner’s prayer to direct Meta to identify and remove allegedly unlawful content from its platforms is repugnant and inconsistent with the Section 79 of the IT Act and the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s precedent that intermediaries, like Meta, cannot be obliged to proactively monitor their platforms for unlawful content.
Against that, Meta had put forth that it can’t be required to proactively monitor and screen its platforms like Facebook or Instagram Services for “explicit” or “unlawful” content as requested by the Petitioner.
Moreover, Meta had also objected to the sustainability of the PIL by stating that Meta is a private entity, and not a “State” or “Other Authority” of the Government and does not come under the purview of Article 12 of the Constitution, hence the PIL improperly seeks reliefs in the nature of Mandamus which is absent in any statutory duty and legal obligation.
Edited By- Subbuthai Padma
Published By- Satheesh Kumar