Could they have picked a better sounding acronym? Maybe APPA (American Privacy and Protection Act)?
American Data Privacy and Protection Act
241–250 of 313 posts
Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act
#242[deleted]
Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act
#243Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can help them if you want! :) https://supporters.eff.org/donate/
The ACLU also does a lot of great privacy work, so donating to them is also a good idea if you care about this stuff. National ACLU does a lot of great work, but I personally suggest giving to your local affiliate https://www.aclu.org/about/affiliates , as they are often the ones who work on local issues that are likely to directly impact you. We do privacy lobbying at the municipal and state level and our local ACLU…
You have not been paying attention to the ACLU.
Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act
#244Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Preemption is always a mistake, i am not sure why everyone wants federal laws for everything So that my marriage is recognized across state lines, for a start.
Why would you the government to be involved in your marriage?
I think the point GP is trying to make is that sometimes state governments try to get involved in marriage and having a federal policy that preempts that can prevent further meddling.
This cuts both ways—with preemption, you can provide baseline rights or guarantees to citizens. The trade-off is that you have federal legislation in the mix and you then need to deal with laws that are slower/harder to change; a big issue if the law was badly written or needs to be changed in a timely manner.
Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act
#245Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not my problem. You're the one collecting the data. You pay for the costs. Can't afford to collect my data? Go out of business then.
We have to process the request regardless of whether we actually have your data or not.
seems like you should either make the lookup automatable or stop collecting. eu citizens wont have such a fee.
Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act
#246Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Preemption is always a mistake, i am not sure why everyone wants federal laws for everything So that my marriage is recognized across state lines, for a start.
eh poor example imo; that's guaranteed by the Constitution, not legislation.
oh? where, exactly? Is that why we needed Obergefell, and Loving, and … ?
Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act
#247Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is normal: https://www.techrepublic.com/article/how-to-request-your-per... >Although, the ICO also notes that a firm may charge a “reasonable fee” when “a request is manifestly unfounded or excessive, particularly if it is repetitive.” Privacy request shouldn't enable mechanisms of denial of service type attacks against companies.
The problem is, "reasonable" is subjective. Things like this need to be tethered to something. "The fee may not exceed 50% of the hourly federal minimum wage."
Yes, what's reasonable to a company may not be reasonable to a consumer. Ie, as a company can create process that uses 10 man hours and my cheapest labor with overhead is $50/hr, but we can find countless CNBC articles that say the average consumer can't afford a $500 expense.
Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act
#248Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Preemption is always a mistake, i am not sure why everyone wants federal laws for everything So that my marriage is recognized across state lines, for a start.
Why would you the government to be involved in your marriage?
Because that’s what marriage is?
Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act
#249Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is, "reasonable" is subjective. Things like this need to be tethered to something. "The fee may not exceed 50% of the hourly federal minimum wage."
That’s just not true. “Reasonable” is a binding term used in contracts all of the time. The court system is extremely experienced in determining what is and is not reasonable.
From a foia perspective the courts and government agencies aren't great at "reasonable".
Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act
#250Earlier quoted context omitted.
After seeing how the ATF operates entirely autonomously to nearly eliminate the right to bear arms through increasingly more unnecessarily complex and ridiculous "rules" that make you felon for things that were previously (and should still be) totally legal, I have zero interest in giving executive agencies autonomy to make laws. And it doesn't matter that the rules can be ruled as ineffective by a high court, becaus…
> unnecessarily complex and ridiculous "rules" that make you felon for things that were previously (and should still be) totally legal Not going into the US-centric gun debate and assuming that guns are simply tools, isn't it reasonable that gun owners need to monitor the regulations? If you operate heavy machinery or run a chemical lab, I'd expect you to keep a close eye on upcoming legislation and rules. I'd not be…
Both of these examples are enterprises, not something a private citizen does. I would also hesitate to say that you can become a felon overnight with either of these scenarios (remember all of the rights lost, including gun ownership, by being labeled a felon). And a majority of businesses shield themselves such that if they do violate the law it’s the business itself penalized, not the workers. In the case of gun ownership it’s the individual being penalized.
To make your example equivalent, imagine if the food truck or some piece of equipment in that truck was suddenly made illegal. And if you’re in possession of it you are now a felon. Yesterday (literally) it was legal and you were not given advanced notice anymore than waking up this morning and receiving notice.
If heavy machinery and food industries operated this way there would be much less competition and likely no food trucks at all