Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

chicagotribune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 447 posts

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#351

Post by DarkWiiPlayer »

Crosseye_Jack wrote: post #309
DarkWiiPlayer wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless I remember it incorrectly, GDPR doesn't even apply to websites that don't target EU citizens; so it really doesn't affect US websites that are clearly aimed primarily at the USA, just because some EU citizen might use it as well. And if a foreign website wants to expand into the european market, then yes, no matter its country of origin, it will have to follow EU rules. So, in conclusion, geoblocking the EU is…

It’s a bit more complex than that. Are they doing business at all in the EU (for a news site, do they have correspondents in the EU?) are they selling extras to the EU (can you pay for no ads, can you buy and they will ship merch to the EU?).

> are they selling extras to the EU

Yes, there's nothing wrong with that. If you take money from EU citizens, then you can be expected to treat at least them in accordance with european standards. If you don't like it, then we don't want your busyness, as simple as that (even though that might not be the position of every citizen, it's essentially what GDPR states)

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#352

Post by DarkWiiPlayer »

nottorp wrote: post #343
Hermel wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently, compliance with GDPR is not worth the hassle for websites that target a non-European audience.

TBH it's Chicago Tribune. I bet 99.95% of the articles there aren't interesting for someone in the EU. A good part of them aren't probably interesting even for an USer living outside the Chicago area. I'd certainly never consider visiting normal US news sites unless - like in this case - they were linked to by HN or some other aggregator I do frequent. Thus, it really makes no sense for them to comply with the GDPR.

By the same logic, they aren't really required to comply with GDPR, so they could just ignore it.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#353

Post by nottorp »

DarkWiiPlayer wrote: post #352
nottorp wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TBH it's Chicago Tribune. I bet 99.95% of the articles there aren't interesting for someone in the EU. A good part of them aren't probably interesting even for an USer living outside the Chicago area. I'd certainly never consider visiting normal US news sites unless - like in this case - they were linked to by HN or some other aggregator I do frequent. Thus, it really makes no sense for them to comply with the GDPR.

By the same logic, they aren't really required to comply with GDPR, so they could just ignore it.

Are you sure they're not part of some media conglomerate that is also doing bussiness in the EU?

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#354

Post by DarkWiiPlayer »

pingyong wrote: post #324
Hermel wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently, compliance with GDPR is not worth the hassle for websites that target a non-European audience.

What I'm wondering about is: If you're not targeting an EU-audience, and you therefore might not even have servers in the EU, and certainly don't have EU-based revenue streams - why do you even care? Can an EU court even do anything in this situation?

From GDPR Article 3:

> 2. This Regulation applies to the processing of personal data of data subjects who are in the Union by a controller or processor not established in the Union, where the processing activities are related to: > (a) the offering of goods or services, irrespective of whether a payment of the data subject is required, to such data subjects in the Union; or > (b) the monitoring of their behaviour as far as their behaviour takes place within the Union.

This makes perfect sense from the perspective of some old politician: It's like shooting someone over the country border. It fails to address the fact that unlike in physical space, on the internet it's not that obvious to see where someone is connecting from (in fact, it's impossible to really say with complete accuracy)

But in my opinion, it's not the wrong choice to assume that, if you're operating on a scale where you can spy on your users and sell their data, you'd be capable of figuring out whether they're in the EU. And, honestly, it's not hard. There's third party software that you can just embed in your website and it automatically generates the cookie warning and even blocks cookies until you've accepted it.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#355

Post by smolder »

anigbrowl wrote: post #197
drevil-v2 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you propose that works? Someone at Google searches for the information? An algorithm or an actual Google employee? If it is a human being then what about your privacy then? What if the Jussie and his manager were using codewords to disguise intent? A search algorithm would not be able to recognise that but a human being can easily infer meaning and intent from the context. What then? There are no easy answers.

If you don't have enough evidence to specify the particular thing you are searching for, too bad. That limitation is written into the Constitution.

It is, though that limitation is essentially ignored by the NSA.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#356

Post by DarkWiiPlayer »

pingyong wrote: post #325
nannal wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then I'm going to vote with my European wallet and commit not to visit sites that block me. Let's see just how much they like that.

They literally intentionally blocked you... that's kinda what they expect to happen lol.

Wooooosh...

(That was the sound of the joke going over your head)

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#357

Post by rkangel »

nottorp wrote: post #343
Hermel wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently, compliance with GDPR is not worth the hassle for websites that target a non-European audience.

TBH it's Chicago Tribune. I bet 99.95% of the articles there aren't interesting for someone in the EU. A good part of them aren't probably interesting even for an USer living outside the Chicago area. I'd certainly never consider visiting normal US news sites unless - like in this case - they were linked to by HN or some other aggregator I do frequent. Thus, it really makes no sense for them to comply with the GDPR.

I understand the logic, and can't say I'd take a different decision in their case. As a UK fan of another NFC North team, not being able to read the Chicago Tribune (without workarounds) is moderately annoying.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#359

Post by Balanceinfinity »

tjoff wrote: post #296
Hermel wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently, compliance with GDPR is not worth the hassle for websites that target a non-European audience.

Yeah, the burden of not exploiting their users really is a huge undertaking.

on the lighter side, I do a lot of cooking and I always laugh when I visit a baking website and I get a popup that warns me about the cookie policy. Because of the context, my brain first goes to "I wonder what the recipe is for those cookies."

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#360

Post by DarkWiiPlayer »

unknown_library wrote: post #305
tjoff wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the burden of not exploiting their users really is a huge undertaking.

GDPR adds a lot of regulatory red tape to things that were previously simple. It is not only for nefarious reasons that you might want to avoid GDPR. Want to store logs? Now you need to make sure you're scrubbing any type of personal information from the logs. Want to use a third-party service? Now you need to make sure that you are using their GDPR-compliant plan, and that you are using their Amsterdam endpoints. Ma…

> Want to store logs? Now you need to make sure you're scrubbing any type of personal information from the logs.

What?! I'm not allowed to store my users name, address and credit card number in my unencrypted syslogs anymore? HOW DARE THEY, THOSE DAMN BEUROCRATS!

Seriously though, while there are problems (like IP address being considered personal information, which they really aren't), the general idea is very positive. You shouldn't be able to store just any information of a person that only gave you this data for a specific purpose. Servers do get hacked, employees do abuse their access to systems and old hardware doesn't always get disposed of properly.

When I'm done using a service, I want my data gone from their servers ASAP, no buts.

Post reply on HN