it said tech companies cannot simply transfer data across the atlantic. data privacy advocates welcomed the ruling but the white house expressed concerns about its economic consequences. >> we are aware of that ruling and while we are reviewing that ruling, we are disappointed the court has struck down an agreement that since 2000 has proved to be critical in protecting both privacy and fostering economic growth in the united states and european union. reporter: 15 years ago, brussels and russia signed an agreement regarding data transfers. but revelations from edward snowden in 2013 aroused suspicions that u.s. spy agencies gained access to massive troves of personal information. >> concerns are initially security but we still have something to do there. after the court ruling, we have a very strong argument in continuing the negotiations and achieving that result.

whistleblower protection project in washington, d c. let's start with edward snowden. i interviewed him earlier this year and he said the decisions he made burned his life to the ground. would you say this court ruling today maybe turns him into a phoenix who rises out of the ashes? is he being given a second chance? guest: i think what was really clear to us, these are public interest whistleblowers and we have been supporting and defending whistleblowers for nearly 40 years. edward snowden's revelations have given the information citizens need to challenge government overreach. this particular decision is deeply important. right to privacy is deeply linked to freedom of expression and we need a public debate about the limits we need to

brent: what do you mean when you say those rights? the student who brought this case to court but the ruling means online surveillance is now illegal. is that true? guest: i think for us it would be more that we hope it is the beginning of the end. there is a shakedown through a lot of different legal systems about what it means. data protection is not easily understood by private citizens, but if we want to ensure our data is safe from being collected without our knowledge and for reasons we have not had an open debate about, eu citizens have a heightened awareness about their privacy from history and this is something i think ciizens globally need to understand so we can have this debate. it would not have been possible

just beginning to be understood. on tuesday, the european court of justice ruled a 15-year-old agreement that regulates is a transfer of data between eu nations and the u.s. is illegal. the message on the court -- european citizens cannot expect the same data protection rights they enjoy at home to be guaranteed by u.s. companies like facebook and google. some say it is a ruling made possible by edward snowden's revelations. reporter: the eu's top court ruled the safe harbor agreement between the u.s. and eu did not sufficiently guarantee the personal data of europeans. it said tech companies cannot

achieving that result. reporter: participants at the security fair now underway in nuremberg welcomed the ruling. >> it was overdue. u.s. companies that store european data in the u.s. have to protect the data. developments in recent years have shown they are not doing that. reporter: for most businesses in europe, data security is a key priority, but it could take time for consumers to become more

about the limits we need to have. they said the safe harbor agreement was agreed to in 2000. a lot of concerns and information edward snowden revealed in his disclosures showed that world changed in the years after the safe harbor agreement and this is a catch up being pushed onto both regulatory authorities and it has an impact on the u.s.. but we can't have trade without ensuring we have fundamental freedoms of the right to privacy