71–80 of 141 posts
Honestly, it sounds like it should be legal. Like the way ADA or CEQA trolling is. After all, that provides a valuable function.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is very doubtful there is any need to search posts. The data are still necessary for the purpose they were originally collected, and there is also a archiving exception which may apply. If I was them I would just send the person their login profile and delete that from the site. Everything else is excepted, including backups which are kept for security. A good community example to look at is Wikipedia. I will star…
data being necessary for original purpose doesn't help; you can withdraw consent
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you offer your services on the Internet, and someone chooses to use them from the EU, that does not mean you "offer your services in the EU". Or do you plan to make all of your web services "respect" the laws of 200+ countries in the world, and for that matter all the sub-jurisdictions of those countries (such as states or provinces or cities) that have their own laws? The EU is not special in that regard, they're…
It is context based. In the case at hand, I think it is fairly clear that the Eve corp wants users from Europe, since otherwise other corps which take users from Europe would out compete them. I'm not an Eve player, but my understanding is that you want your corp to be as large as possible to produce certain ships/stations? Other contexts, like a company offering investments to US based startups is unlikely to be see…
As much as I like the idea of "right to be forgotten", it seems to me that an unintended consequence is that non-technical people hosting forums/blogs etc. will be at risk of GDPR requests that they cannot comply with due to lack of technical skills. This will have a silencing effect for people wanting to operate non-profit sites as they won't be able to afford to comply with such requests. They will be forced to eit…
For example, in the UK both of the above are law since 1998. And that only implements an EU Directive from 1995.
Sometimes I feel that the main effect of the publicity around the GDPR has been for many people to discover existing laws...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems like the AggregateIQ case shows the problem with this - by obeying the request, they admit that the EU has jurisdiction over them. That's probably the wrong thing to do when they have no connection to the EU, other than people from the EU choosing to connect to a server hosted elsewhere. It's probably the same reason why Hacker News does nothing to comply with the GDPR.
Your legal concept isn't valid. Hacker News can comply with GDPR today and choose not to comply the next day. They forfeit nothing in the process of selectively abandoning GDPR, in regards to being governed by US law and not EU law. If my company is located in the US and only governed by US jurisdiction (eg I do not operate in the EU in any manner), there's no such concept as admitting the EU has jurisdiction over my…
https://news.sky.com/story/huawei-cfo-meng-wanzhou-facing-ex...
> The global chief financial officer of Chinese phone firm Huawei is facing extradition to the US after being arrested in Canada.
> Meng Wanzhou, who is the daughter of company founder Ren Zhengfei, has been detained in Vancouver in relation to suspected violations by Huawei of US sanctions placed on Iran.
So not only do people have to avoid the U.S. to avoid being subject to U.S. laws, they have to avoid U.S. friendly countries too.
As much as I like the idea of "right to be forgotten", it seems to me that an unintended consequence is that non-technical people hosting forums/blogs etc. will be at risk of GDPR requests that they cannot comply with due to lack of technical skills. This will have a silencing effect for people wanting to operate non-profit sites as they won't be able to afford to comply with such requests. They will be forced to eit…
As much as I like the idea of "right to be forgotten", it seems to me that an unintended consequence is that non-technical people hosting forums/blogs etc. will be at risk of GDPR requests that they cannot comply with due to lack of technical skills. This will have a silencing effect for people wanting to operate non-profit sites as they won't be able to afford to comply with such requests. They will be forced to eit…
Responding to myself: Of course, this could have been the intention all along. It has long been recognized that big business loves difficult to conform with regulations (regardless of their protestations otherwise) because it is hard for smaller competitors to breach the effective moat that heavy/complex regulations provide incumbents.
- store as little data as needed - protect the data in state of the art ways - make transparent what you store and process and why - establish a process to delete data once it's not needed anymore
It is only complicated if you want to build a company around the abuse of data, as common in the ad world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is context based. In the case at hand, I think it is fairly clear that the Eve corp wants users from Europe, since otherwise other corps which take users from Europe would out compete them. I'm not an Eve player, but my understanding is that you want your corp to be as large as possible to produce certain ships/stations? Other contexts, like a company offering investments to US based startups is unlikely to be see…
America set the precedent with arresting foreign nationals for breaching US laws while on foreign territory with Dmitry Sklyarov
It set the precedent for arresting foreign national for breaching US laws while on foreign territory considerably before Sklyarov's arrest in 2001; some notable prior examples include Humberto Alvarez Machain (1985) and Manuel Noriega (1989), though they weren't the earliest, either.
Insofar as Sklyarov's case was notable, it was more because the charged offenses were completely legal where they occurred, not because they were allegedly committed by a foreign national outside of the US.
What's interesting, and pointed out by a Reddit comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/acsdf3/comment... There's no way to identify that the person making the request is who he/she says he/she is. The irony is that for services like Facebook, Facebook could ask for a scan of your id/passport to confirm it's you, (and would it also have to keep that scan saved somewhere in case it later needs to prove…
As much as I like the idea of "right to be forgotten", it seems to me that an unintended consequence is that non-technical people hosting forums/blogs etc. will be at risk of GDPR requests that they cannot comply with due to lack of technical skills. This will have a silencing effect for people wanting to operate non-profit sites as they won't be able to afford to comply with such requests. They will be forced to eit…
It's not CCP? Because Iceland is not a member of the EU although I suppose they could be subject to this somehow(?)