161–170 of 409 posts
So it's a weasel move. Let the record show that Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg weaseled out of GDPR to the greatest degree possible given the opportunity. It's all perfectly legal, but decidedly non-excellent and non-exemplary.
Zuckerberg went to Congress and told them Facebook would support GDPR, as if the only thing GDPR is are just some controls you'd do at the user interface level (and as we learned today, that they're attempting to get around with dark pattern designs [1]). GDPR is much more comprehensive than that, but most importantly it gives data privacy regulators real teeth to enforce with (fines up to 4% of global revenue). The…
You are assuming GDPR is good. I don’t think so. I don’t want GDRP in the US. The worst abuser of privacy - right now - is the government. I don’t think putting redtapes on startups will solve anything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you just say, "Oh I have consent" then the user can withdraw consent. If you actually needed that information (like the user's name!) then you are absolutely screwed. Well, only screwed if they want to keep their account? I can assume that resulting in Facebook closing down your account. All in all, I doubt millions of people will request data under the GDPR. But I guess the fines are significant enough to worry…
The really, really, really awesome thing about GDPR is that you can't deny service because someone wants to opt out of sharing their data. You actually have to keep their account active and make it work somehow. If you can't, then you are libel for a really huge penalty. I can't add enough smileys to that, so you will just have to imagine them.
Not that I'm against the GDPR. It seems to be a great law for consumers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I'm skeptical of the EU's ability to enforce their laws on someone outside of the EU (citizen or not) with a business outside of the EU.
I agree, but they aren’t completely powerless, either. A CEO of a company that has been convicted won’t be able to visit a conference in London, go on holiday to Paris, etc. for example. Also, any assets on accounts in the EU could be frozen or confiscated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Website terms and conditions could ask for a pint of blood from their firstborn and people would still click okay. No one reads these things. The GDPR is just going to end up being a more annoying version of the cookie law.
I'd be interested if you could ask your users if they are _not_ a EU resident. Only if they click yes go ahead, otherwise show that you will not serve them. Probably 90% would learn to click the "Not from EU" button. Who should hold you accountable for false user input in that case?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If FB moves all their operations out if the EU, how does the EU tax a company? Presumably EU companies can do business with non-EU companies without the other company having an EU presence? Genuinely curious. Not sure how this works as I'm not a bizguy.
> If FB moves all their operations out if the EU, how does the EU tax a company? If Facebook moved its servers and personnel out of the EU to avoid complying with EU law, I'd fully expect--and support--the EU to (a) punitively taxing EU businesses buying Facebook ads, (b) banning EU businesses from buying said ads, (c) extraditing Facebook executives to the EU and then (d) blocking Facebook in the EU. No jurisdiction…
So, does GDPR applies to ?: - European citizens only currently living in the EU ? - European citizens worldwide ? - Everyone currently living in the EU ? As a European living in the US, I'm wondering.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see it written there but that doesn't mean its enforceable.
Yeah, I'm skeptical of the EU's ability to enforce their laws on someone outside of the EU (citizen or not) with a business outside of the EU.
This article is really confusing. Basically the point is that under the current terms of service they tell you that if you are outside of the US then you are doing business with their Ireland office. Since the Ireland office is in the EU, it is subject to the GDPR. So that means that everybody outside of the US will be covered by the GDPR (because they are doing business with an EU company). They are changing their t…
I predict Max Schrems will continue his legal cases against Facebook. He has co-founded an NGO (NOYB) which has raised €330k in donations & membership fees to use the GDPR to protect privacy. https://noyb.eu/
Schrems has basically single-handedly proven that Safe Harbor, and I think the Privacy Shield, too (soon to be decided) have been violating the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the right to privacy under the European Convention of Human Rights.
Is this news? Facebook had already stated that it wasn’t applying GDPR to non-Europeans. Also, the headline is misleading: it makes it sound like FB is trying to get around laws. Really, all it’s doing is applying laws in the required jurisdictions, which is how things always work. Where’s the controversy?
Yes. Previously anyone not in the USA or Canada had a legal agreement with Facebook Ireland Ltd. So there was an Irish/EU company which was processing personal data for lots of people (inside & outside the EU). The GDPR says it applies to (i) people in the EU or (ii) companies in the EU who process any personal data. So if Facebook Ireland Ltd did something against EU law with the personal data of (say) someone from South Africa, then EU law could take that up.
BTW The GDPR never mentions citizenship, merely presence in the EU. non-Europeans in the EU are covered too.