Weak U.S. privacy laws damage U.S. global status

Large technology company Expand the nationalist argument Implying that the establishment of a company in the United States is equivalent to ensuring that their business model will not undermine U.S. national security or U.S. foreign policy. However, if there is no federal privacy law to restrict data collection and sharing, this is still an exaggeration. This data brokering ecosystem allows U.S. citizen data to eventually fall into the hands of foreign governments, threatening national security and possibly undermining U.S. foreign policy and foreign policy activities. It also weakens the credibility of the United States on data issues; if the White House takes action against individual Chinese technology companies and Congress fails to pass privacy laws, for example, seeking to eliminate the potential means by which Beijing can spy on American citizens, then the United States seems to be more focused Targeting the company rather than mitigating the overall data-spread hazards.

However, the arguments of these large technology companies are related to the second concern of weak U.S. privacy laws: distrust of U.S. overseas technology companies.

There are countless legitimate reasons for American technology giants’ reputation problems abroad, from Pure market power with Widely lobby to Spread hatred online And a lot of, Exploitative Collect data more widely. Phrases such as “data colonialism” and “digital colonialism” have been used to describe this phenomenon, especially when large technology companies enter resource-poor countries (such as Venezuela, Uganda, India), monitor citizens and extract all value back Their headquarters at the same time Continuation of other issues Such as unequal division of labor.

It doesn’t have to be. At present, according to the European Court of Justice ruling, US civil servants are renegotiating a transatlantic data transmission agreement with their EU counterparts. Invalidation The Privacy Shield framework will take effect in July 2020. Some people may have good reasons to argue that the European Court of Justice will find any reason to invalidate any EU-U.S. data transfer agreement. But Washington can strengthen its position by imposing new and real restrictions on the collection, sharing, and use of data by American companies. Although the decision to invalidate the Privacy Shield Schrems II focused on nationally secure access to data in the United States, the lack of sound privacy laws in the United States almost always enters the same discussion of deficiencies.

Passing strong federal privacy laws in the United States can also help US companies deal with the increasingly complex and fragmented global regulatory environment.For example, Indian Personal Data Protection ActLaunched in 2019 and still under review, it is inspired by the EU’s GDPR (although it includes a series of dangerous state exemptions).Brazilian General Data Protection Law Also have Similarities To GDPR. The more privacy laws enacted by other governments, the greater the regulatory challenges American companies face and the greater the risk of global public distrust.

Although politicians are talking about the importance of having competitive American technology companies, this should not be at the expense of democratic regulation that protects citizens from data-related abuse-nor should the control of data abuse be regarded as competition The opposite sector of technology. On the contrary, as more and more data systems appear on a global scale, Silicon Valley is facing more and more rigorous scrutiny in overseas markets, and the trust in artificial intelligence begins to depend in part on a country’s privacy system, through a strong federal Privacy laws may bring many benefits to the United States technological competitiveness.

Recently announced Meimei Trade and Technology CommitteeThe United States and EU member states will use it to conduct dialogue on all aspects from Internet policy to standard setting, and have a strong hidden concern for China. Beyond G7, Biden Reiterate Focus on providing a “democratic alternative” to the influence of the Chinese government.

Biden plans to unite democracies technically Face many challenges, Partly because it is not yet clear whether the framework of democracy and authoritarianism is the best way to combat digital suppression. Depending on how the plan is implemented, it may also mistakenly ignore differences between democracies on how to deal with technological challenges.For example, the EU member states are Almost in step Communicates with Washington on a series of Internet policy issues.In these dialogues, India is often assigned to a democratic group, but the Modi government’s inhibition, Attack on democracy, with Internet abuse Question this.