Page tree

Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Comment: Removed references to Safe Harbour which has been invalidated by the European Court of Justice.


The European Commission publishes a list of countries with adequate level of protection. For instance, in Switzerland and Argentina, data protection laws ensure adequate level of protection. Canada has sector-specific data protection legislation, and the protection is adequate if the Canadian data controller is subject to the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act. In the United States, the level of data protection is adequate if the data controller is committed to the "Safe Harbor privacy principles" that the US Department of Commerce and the Commission have agreed on. Unfortunately, it appears that the universities do not belong to the jurisdiction of the US Department of Commerce and the Safe Harbour arrangement cannot be applied.

The Service Provider's jurisdiction follows the data controller. If the Service Provider is a data controller, the Service Provider's local laws on data protection are applied to the Service Provider. If the Service Provider is a data processor (i.e. processes personal data on behalf of the Home Organisation), the Home Organisation's laws are applied.


In a (inter)federation, direct contracts between Home Organisations and Service Providers are not expected in general, which suggests that this Code of Conduct alone cannot be used by Service Providers who are not bound to an adequate level of protection by the local law or the US Safe Harbour privacy principles. This does not exclude US exclude non-Europan Service Providers or even federations to receive Attributes from Home Organisations in EU/EEA, but their data protection issues must be solved using some other mechanism.