US-UK Data-Sharing Agreement Might Not Soothe Law Firms' Cloud Concerns
The bilateral data sharing agreement is the first under the CLOUD Act. While it offers similar abilities currently available to law enforcement agencies, it may not sway law firms reluctant to place client data on the cloud.
October 22, 2019 at 10:00 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Legal Tech News
U.S. attorney general William Barr and U.K. home secretary Priti Patel earlier this month signed the first bilateral data access agreement, a new mechanism created after last year's CLOUD Act was implemented.
However, the agreement signed on October 3 isn't likely to assuage law firms' privacy concerns about storing sensitive client data on the cloud, as it only requires government agencies to notify service providers, and not the person whose data is accessed, when data is requested. But observers note that the agreement allows government authorities similar data access granted prior to the CLOUD Act's implementation.
The agreement was made possible because of the Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data Act (CLOUD Act), which amended the Stored Communications Act (SCA) in 2018. The bill included language that would compel U.S. providers of "electronic communication service or remote computing" to adhere with government authorities' requests for information belonging to U.S. citizens but stored outside the U.S. The measure also compels U.S. providers to comply with similar requests from other nations seeking information belonging to their citizens.
The law also allows the U.S. attorney general to negotiate data transfer agreements between nations, with a six-month timeframe for Congress to review. To be sure, U.S. and foreign law enforcement agencies have previously requested and accessed citizens' data held in foreign jurisdictions through Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLATS), which had to be approved by two thirds of the U.S. Senate.
But in the press release announcing the U.S-U.K. agreement, the U.S. Department of Justice said: "The current legal assistance process can take up to two years, but the agreement will reduce this time period considerably, while protecting privacy and enhancing civil liberties."
At the time of the bill's passage, Gregory Nojeim, senior counsel at the Center for Democracy & Technology, said the new approval process granted the DOJ "enormous discretion to choose which countries will be able to make these direct demands on U.S. providers and, in essence, gain access to their worldwide user base".
A year after the CLOUD Act, the first data-sharing agreement is most relevant to U.K. law enforcement agencies having access to the vast data held by U.S.-based tech companies, said Trisha Anderson, a Covington & Burling partner and former DOJ associate deputy attorney general.
"The most significant impact is the access it affords to U.S.-based data providers," she said. "But it doesn't expand access beyond [that] which was already available."
For law firms concerned about truly safeguarding their encrypted client data, even when they own the encryption keys, Anderson noted the CLOUD Act prohibits any agreement from allowing legal authorities to mandate the decryption of encrypted data.
"What this agreement does is it provides a privacy framework that imposes certain restrictions on the circumstances for which the U.K. government can access that data, and the matter with which they access and maintain that data once it is obtained," she said.
Likewise, because the CLOUD Act provides the agreement's framework, Anderson said the U.S-U.K. agreement could serve as a model for other nations' data-sharing agreements with the U.S.
Indeed, other nations are already in discussion with the U.S. to set up an agreement under the CLOUD Act, according to the DOJ's press office. A few days after signing the U.S-U.K. agreement, the DOJ announced it was in formal negotiations with Australia to strike a CLOUD Act agreement. Meanwhile, in late September, the European Commission and U.S. Department of Justice said it started formal negotiations on an agreement to "facilitate access" to electronic evidence in criminal investigations.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJones Day, BCLP & Other Major Firms Boost European Teams with Key Partner Hires
4 minute read$13.8 Billion Magomedov Claim Thrown Out by UK High Court
Trending Stories
- 1South Florida Attorney Charged With Aggravated Battery After Incident in Prime Rib Line
- 2'A Death Sentence for TikTok'?: Litigators and Experts Weigh Impact of Potential Ban on Creators and Data Privacy
- 3Bribery Case Against Former Lt. Gov. Brian Benjamin Is Dropped
- 4‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
- 5State Appeals Court Revives BraunHagey Lawsuit Alleging $4.2M Unlawful Wire to China
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250