Stock Exchange Interconnections and Legal Issues in Data Exchange

Radim Polčák


If philosophical cybernetics was interested in stock exchanges, it would probably treat them as relatively simple information structures. From that perspective, stock exchanges can be viewed as places where data on supply and demand of various negotiable instruments are processed. Besides that, stock exchanges, as institutions, provide respective transactions with additional informational (organisational) value that mostly consist of trust regarding the traders, clearing etc.

Consequently, a stock exchange interconnection can be seen as very natural process providing for bigger pool of useful data. One of key tasks in the establishment of exchange schemes is then not to hinder or diminish the added information value, i.e. to at least keep the existing level of trust. In that sense, one of the most important components of interconnection design is the legal compliance.

In the comment, we will examine some of the most emerging legal issues in data sharing between stock exchanges that were subject to examination under recently concluded project ‘Creating a legal and regulatory framework for interconnections between stock exchanges: A comparative study of the UK and Taiwan’ funded by the British Academy (UK) and the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan. We will particularly focus in this comment on compliance issues in cross-border transfers of personal data and newly emerging regulatory phenomenon of cybersecurity.



Stock Exchange, Data Protection, Cybersecurity, Virtualisation

Full Text:


Show references Hide references

[1] Batog, C. Blockchain (2015) A Proposal to Reform High Frequency Trading Regulation. Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, 33, p. 739.

[2] Bender, D. (2016) Having Mishandled Safe Harbor, Will the CJEU do Better with Privacy Shield? A US perspective. International Data Privacy Law, 6(2), p. 117.

[3] Bledstein, N. (2013) Is Cyber Espionage a Form of Market Manipulation. Journal of Law & Cyber Warfare, 2(1), p. 104.

[4] Case C 582/14 Patrick Breyer v. Bundesrepublik Deutschland, ECLI:EU:C:2016:779.

[5] Caran, P. C. (1975 1978) Some Aspects of the Stock Exchange: Its Nature and Functions. Victoria University Wellington Law Review, 8, p. 71.

[6] Chiu, I. H Y. (2016) Fintech and Disruptive Business Models in Financial Products, Intermediation and Markets – Policy Implications for Financial Regulators. Journal of Technology Law & Policy, 21, p. 55.

[7] De Hert, P., Czerniawski, M. (2016) Expanding the European Data Protection Scope Beyond Territory: Article 3 of the General Data Protection Regulation in its Wider Context. International Data Privacy Law, 6(3), p. 230.

[8] Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, 31995L0046, OJ L 281, 23. 11. 1995, p. 31–50 .

[9] Directive (EU) 2016/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 2016 concerning measures for a high common level of security of network and information systems across the Union, 32016L1148, OJ L 194, 19.7.2016, p. 1–30.

[10] Engelen, P. J. (2006) Changes in the Securities Trading Landscape in Europe and the U.S. Competition and Regulation in Network Industries, 1, p. 439.

[11] Frankel, T. (1998) The Internet, Securities Regulation, and Theory of Law. Chicago–Kent Law Review, 73, p. 1319.

[12] Gross, O. (2015) Cyber Responsibility to Protect: Legal Obligations of States Directly Affected by Cyber-Incidents. Cornell International Law Journal, 48, p. 481.

[13] Kokkoris, I. and Olivares Caminal, R. (2007 2008) Some Issues on Cross-Border Stock Exchange Mergers. University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law, 29(2), p. 455.

[14] Lee, L. (2017) New Kids on the Blockchain: How Bitcoin's Technology Could Reinvent the Stock Market. Hastings Business Law Journal, 12, p. 81.

[15] Lévy, P. (1997) Welcome to virtuality. Digital Creativity, 8(1), p. 3.

[16] Lévy, P. (2002) Becoming Virtual – Reality in the Digital Age. New York: Plenum Trade.

[17] McCullagh, K. (2017) Brexit: Potential Trade and Data implications for Digital and ‘fintech’ Industries. International Data Privacy Law, 7(1), p. 3.

[18] Oostveen, M. (2016) Identifiability and the Applicability of Data Protection to Big Data. International Data Privacy Law, 6(4), p. 299.

[19] Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), 32016R0679, OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1–88.

[20] Reyes, C. L. (2016) Moving Beyond Bitcoin to an Endogenous Theory of Decentralized Ledger Technology Regulation: An Initial Proposal. Villanova Law Review, 61, p. 191.

[21] Trautmann, L. J., Harell, A. C. (2017) Bitcoin Versus Regulated Payment Systems: What Gives? Cardozo Law Review, 38, p. 1041.

[22] Walch, A. (2015) The Bitcoin Blockchain as Financial Market Infrastructure: A Consideration of Operational Risk. N.Y.U. Journal of Legislation and Public Policy, 18, p. 837.

[23] Yadlin, O. Should the Sec Regulate the Cybersecurities Market? Chicago–Kent Law Review, 73, p. 1355.

Copyright (c) 2017 Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology