31–40 of 553 posts
So the author would rather see each state/country implement it’s own laws so that a small startup needs to ensure they comply with hundreds of regulatory jurisdictions... awesome.
or, you could not start a business that requires you capture every single facet of a person's life as a data point.
We need to have a conversation about jurisdictions in the digital age. The way governments have decided that having a website accessible in a country makes you liable to respect the law of this country is a convulted and hacky notion that has been accepted way too fast. The physical establishment rule was the only sound approach. The fact that some countries started to lose shouldn't have allowed them to rewrite the…
Thats a bad metaphor. If you open a grocery store in one country you follow the relevant law of said country. If you extend you business to another country the new store has to follow the law of the other country.
The problem with physical establishment is that it could create a 'race to the bottom', similar to tax laws. With non-tangible elements like privacy, what stops big players like the USA to implement weak privacy protections to get a competitive edge?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The gist of these laws are all the same. Just respect ALL users' data from the start, and you shouldn't have any difficulty with compliance.
Totally disagree. Complicate is not the same thing as following the spirit of the rules. Compliance is proving you followed the rules. Totally different. Also, you have to define what you mean by “respecting privacy”. Something that I do on my website, like basic retargeting marketing for abandoned shopping carts doesn’t feel to me like an invasion of privacy. To you, it might. The rules have to be defined clearly.
If you have a shopping cart, you must collect billing and shipping information. But you don't need to use it for any other purpose.
So the author would rather see each state/country implement it’s own laws so that a small startup needs to ensure they comply with hundreds of regulatory jurisdictions... awesome.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The gist of these laws are all the same. Just respect ALL users' data from the start, and you shouldn't have any difficulty with compliance.
Totally disagree. Complicate is not the same thing as following the spirit of the rules. Compliance is proving you followed the rules. Totally different. Also, you have to define what you mean by “respecting privacy”. Something that I do on my website, like basic retargeting marketing for abandoned shopping carts doesn’t feel to me like an invasion of privacy. To you, it might. The rules have to be defined clearly.
It's not for the operator of a website to decide what is an invasion of _my_ privacy. It's for the consumer to decide. And that's precisely why we can't rely on website administrators, or the "recipients" of data to determine whether something is private.
I'm one of those website administrators who wholeheartedly welcomes something like GDPR here, even though it would make my job harder. But hey, that's fine. Putting privacy back in the hands of consumers is the right thing to do.
So the author would rather see each state/country implement it’s own laws so that a small startup needs to ensure they comply with hundreds of regulatory jurisdictions... awesome.
The gist of these laws are all the same. Just respect ALL users' data from the start, and you shouldn't have any difficulty with compliance.
We need to have a conversation about jurisdictions in the digital age. The way governments have decided that having a website accessible in a country makes you liable to respect the law of this country is a convulted and hacky notion that has been accepted way too fast. The physical establishment rule was the only sound approach. The fact that some countries started to lose shouldn't have allowed them to rewrite the…
Can you imagine a grocery chain who wants to profit from potential customers all over the world but doesn't want to obey local laws in the jurisdictions it operates in?
If people don't want to serve people outside their jurisdiction, do an IP lookup as some US outlets chose to do.
Hacky US start-ups don't get to dictate the rules of the game to the world.
So the author would rather see each state/country implement it’s own laws so that a small startup needs to ensure they comply with hundreds of regulatory jurisdictions... awesome.
The gist of these laws are all the same. Just respect ALL users' data from the start, and you shouldn't have any difficulty with compliance.
Anyway, the only companies that will end up being able to collect data at all are there very biggest ones. Everyone else will have to just fly under the radar or use some kind of SAAS solution to comply with the patchwork of regulation. Not sure that’s really the desired outcome
So the author would rather see each state/country implement it’s own laws so that a small startup needs to ensure they comply with hundreds of regulatory jurisdictions... awesome.
Yeah... CCPA and GDPR have proved that large enterprises will do just fine, because Amazon can always afford enough lawyers to handle regulatory overhead and confusion across territories. The startups end up either (1) ignoring the laws or (2) giving up. Good job EU, if making the FAANGs the only companies with the clout to hold customer data or break into new markets was your primary goal.
So the author would rather see each state/country implement it’s own laws so that a small startup needs to ensure they comply with hundreds of regulatory jurisdictions... awesome.