Zero surprise. Gonna be a bonanza for lawyers. We got patent trolls now we'll have GDRP trolls. I like parts of this law like being able to see all the data they have on me and actually delete it but imo you consent when you sign up for the service. Don't like what they are doing; Don't sign up. If this guy wins it legalizes freeloading which is theft by government. Infrastructure cost money and I get it FB has the scale to absorb some of the costs but a lot of companies likely won't when now they have to defend themselves from lawsuits as well as added compliance costs.
Nobody reads T&Cs. Company directors know that. Lawyers know that. They are rarely written in plain language and they obfuscate what the deal really consists of. Facebook/Google could easily write on their landing pages "We provide this service in exchange for use of your personal information". People who agree to that would be giving real, informed consent. Any of us that talk to non-geek, non-SV human beings know that most people don't understand the deal they're making when they sign up to these services, instead seeing Google/FB as some kind of supercool charities that make stuff for free just to be nice. Thankfully that's starting to change.
Pretending that clicking 'accept' under a page of legalese constitutes consent in any meaningful way is disingenuous and as a society we need to grow past it.
Do EU lawsuits require the plaintiff to pay the legal costs of the defendant if they lose? If so, I doubt we'll be seeing GDRP trolls unless those GDRP trolls are well financed and prepared to pay all of the legal costs.
Cue the apologists claiming this isn't going to be a money grab very largely targeting American tech companies, and that GDPR regulators are going to be very gentle, rational, and friendly in shepherding companies towards privacy compliance.
I agree with the GDPR in principle, but the manner in which the enforcement was setup, and the way it didn't phase in the aspects over time, and the way the fines are subjective from painful to destructive without any clear guidance as to how they will be levied, and considering the regulations were written in such a way that people seem to have a very poor understanding of what the actual rules are unless they have legal teams giving them the answers leaves me with doubts that this isn't yet another European regulatory money grab at the same time that it's a much needed advancement on privacy reform.
What's even better is all the non-lawyers posting blog posts saying STOP FREAKING OUT!!! Stop interpreting the rules wrong!!!
When you create a system that could amount to a severe financial risk, in the way this was done, I can't exactly rest easy given the advice of Jon Q. Blogspam Esq attorney from Wordpress School of Law.
If GDPR were clearly and rationally written, if it had a explicit grace period and progressive fines rather than instant potential massive liability, if regulators had front loaded more of the official clarifications prior to it taking effect so that everyone wouldn't have to pay law firms to ask the same questions, etc then we wouldn't all be flooded with stupid emails and misfires by every company we do business with. And saying that anyone who is afraid of GDPR is doing something bad with user data is just unfounded slander.
I am extremely pro-privacy and what they're trying to do for privacy here is great. The execution could have been much better. And I highly doubt the apologists will be around to explain why they were wrong when people operating in good faith, trying their best to be compliant are fined for non-compliance in an audit.
Facebook and Google flagarantly skirted the laws. Facebook ignored the whole bit about how you can't make consent contingent on providing service. A dialog forcing people to click "I Agree" like it was any old EULA flys in the face of both the letter and the spirit of the law.
Unsurprising. As an American small business owner, the American market is plenty big for me. I would not take a European client because it’s not worth the risk.
In the heated GDPR debates in Hacker News over the past few weeks, it was argued again and again that no lawsuits would happen because that's the US way, In Europe it's different, and the law is phrased in such way as that people can only complain to the regulator, who will serve as a free sanity filter. Only if the regulator decides there's a violation, then lawsuits can occur.
AdamM12|7 years ago
firmgently|7 years ago
Pretending that clicking 'accept' under a page of legalese constitutes consent in any meaningful way is disingenuous and as a society we need to grow past it.
bitmapbrother|7 years ago
Do EU lawsuits require the plaintiff to pay the legal costs of the defendant if they lose? If so, I doubt we'll be seeing GDRP trolls unless those GDRP trolls are well financed and prepared to pay all of the legal costs.
jgowdy|7 years ago
I agree with the GDPR in principle, but the manner in which the enforcement was setup, and the way it didn't phase in the aspects over time, and the way the fines are subjective from painful to destructive without any clear guidance as to how they will be levied, and considering the regulations were written in such a way that people seem to have a very poor understanding of what the actual rules are unless they have legal teams giving them the answers leaves me with doubts that this isn't yet another European regulatory money grab at the same time that it's a much needed advancement on privacy reform.
What's even better is all the non-lawyers posting blog posts saying STOP FREAKING OUT!!! Stop interpreting the rules wrong!!!
When you create a system that could amount to a severe financial risk, in the way this was done, I can't exactly rest easy given the advice of Jon Q. Blogspam Esq attorney from Wordpress School of Law.
If GDPR were clearly and rationally written, if it had a explicit grace period and progressive fines rather than instant potential massive liability, if regulators had front loaded more of the official clarifications prior to it taking effect so that everyone wouldn't have to pay law firms to ask the same questions, etc then we wouldn't all be flooded with stupid emails and misfires by every company we do business with. And saying that anyone who is afraid of GDPR is doing something bad with user data is just unfounded slander.
I am extremely pro-privacy and what they're trying to do for privacy here is great. The execution could have been much better. And I highly doubt the apologists will be around to explain why they were wrong when people operating in good faith, trying their best to be compliant are fined for non-compliance in an audit.
slededit|7 years ago
clay_the_ripper|7 years ago
emiliobumachar|7 years ago
Is that plain wrong, or am I missing something?
craftyguy|7 years ago
domakidis|7 years ago
https://i.imgur.com/Kw38lOB.png
unknown|7 years ago
[deleted]
craftyguy|7 years ago
jacquesm|7 years ago
unknown|7 years ago
[deleted]
jesusofsuburbia|7 years ago
[deleted]