@janitor is assuming the Safe Harbour provision is the only means US companies have for repatriation of EU citizen data. It’s not.
Also, he’s assuming that the issue is independent of other factors, and the basis of the ruling itself.
The reason for the ruling is that SH was not protecting privacy, because Ed Snowden revealed that it was giving the NSA GCHQ unfettered access to EU citizen, and company, data. Since SAFENetwork would prevent that, it is daft to assume it will be caught by this, and even if it is, eel there are other provisions available, which have not been touched at this point.
So long as US companies can show they are protecting users from this, I think we can expect the EU’s existing provisions to continue. It may try to insist that the USA do more than ensure companies self certify this, as is currently the case. I can’t see the U.S. conceding on this, hence very little impact for any company which can claim that data is not blatantly vulnerable to mass indiscriminate access by the NSA.
I really think @janitor needs to demonstrate how this decision somehow undermines all the provisions, especially when the basis for it would seem unlikely to apply to data protected by encryption, because this makes it inaccessible to indiscriminate surveillance.
I can see there being an impact, tighter rules, improvements in due process etc, but I really don’t see how this is going to prevent US companies from operating a service using SAFE Network. Whether they will choose to is a different question.