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

Dutch DPA fines Uber €290M because of transfers of drivers’ data to the US

autoriteitpersoonsgegevens.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 414 posts

Re: Dutch DPA fines Uber €290M because of transfers of drivers’ data to the US

#281

Post by kmlx »

StrLght wrote: post #212
kmlx wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this take is naive. building alternatives takes time and resources. the EU has neither. a diverse, competitive tech ecosystem with both EU and non-EU players is better than a protectionist approach. hoping for an exodus of major global players when you’re leapfrogged by both China and the US…

What makes you think there are no alternatives to Uber in EU right now? Actually, it's the opposite: * ride hailing alternatives: FreeNow, Bolt * food delivery: Wolt (technically owned by DoorDash, but still), Just Eat, Bolt Food * bikes / scooters: Tier, Bolt, NextBike, Voi, and many others If Uber leaves, there won't be any void to fill.

agree. but competition will always trump protectionism in the long term.

Re: Dutch DPA fines Uber €290M because of transfers of drivers’ data to the US

#282

Post by jonathan_landy »

snowpid wrote: post #256
johnloeber wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where does it say that I lived in the US my whole life? You're getting ahead of yourself. From another blog post: > I grew up in Europe (mostly Germany, Denmark, Switzerland). I had never even set foot outside the continent until I was 18, when I moved to the United States. I have lived here for 12 years now, with most of that in San Francisco.

Dankeschön für die Antwort! You might understand that I read only Bio and LinkedIn, not your whole blog. Also again very very American thinking. Im just amused.

And which kind of thinking led you to assert he lived in us his whole life on the basis of what little you read?

Re: Dutch DPA fines Uber €290M because of transfers of drivers’ data to the US

#283

Post by rendall »

silent_cal wrote: post #264
creesch wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Silly question, the EU simply has stricter privacy and data protection laws. As these came into effect relatively recently, a lot of these companies are trying to see what they can get away with. Or at the very least taking a calculated risk that the regulation authorities are not going after them. So the only way to actually get them to respect these laws is by attaching actual tangible consequences to breaking them…

I know EU has stronger data privacy laws. I just wonder if they're really all that upset about American companies breaking them. They get to use the new tech and fine the companies that bring that tech to them. It's a win-win.

What does "upset" mean here? How does this human emotion "upset" apply to the European Union? Is Uber "upset"?

Re: Dutch DPA fines Uber €290M because of transfers of drivers’ data to the US

#284

Post by Y_Y »

acedTrex wrote: post #257
Y_Y wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fact were talking about a Dutch company, Uber BV. If it can't abide by EU law then it shouldn't exist! And does US law really prevent them from handling EU customer data in a compliant way? Could you give a specific example?

You could argue that the CLOUD act is in direct conflict with European data laws. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLOUD_Act However, it does not prevent data at rest being stored in the EU. Only that if requested the american company has to exfiltrate it to the states.

Thanks, it seems like indeed the US government could request that an EU subsidiary of a US entity provide data on an EU subject. This request could be lawful under US law but not EU and hence you'd have a conflict.

https://www.edps.europa.eu/sites/default/files/publication/1...

Re: Dutch DPA fines Uber €290M because of transfers of drivers’ data to the US

#285

Post by lossolo »

lifestyleguru wrote: post #261
lossolo wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, it’s anecdotal to your circle. Maybe you're just using some shady providers? Because that’s not my experience or the experience of those in my circle. You should be more careful when buying stuff online; this is where these things happen, not in doctors' offices.

Nope, it's the healthcare service providers. What do you mean by "shady" how do I recognize them? The blood test lab where local legit doctor sends blood is shady? > careful when buying stuff online I know what I'm doing online. You sound like communication from most of retail banks.

If my experience differs from yours, where you claim that something illegal is happening, it obviously suggests that you might be using some kind of shady services. The only time I've had experiences like the one you’re describing is when I was using online shopping or other non-medical services.

If you are so certain that you are right and that you 'know what you are doing online,' have you reported this incident to law enforcement? It would benefit everybody. Could you also specify which healthcare service providers you believe sold your data? This information could help others avoid using them.

Re: Dutch DPA fines Uber €290M because of transfers of drivers’ data to the US

#286

Post by mananaysiempre »

AlanYx wrote: post #259
pyrale wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but it illustrates the depth of legal uncertainty that exists in architecting software systems in Europe that process personal information. Oh I agree with that. EC's behaviour in that case is appalling. > Corporations can't necessarily trust the EC's own interpretations of their own laws There is a way to be safe with regards to EU law, and it's to engineer systems where European data stays in Europe. Of course, t…

It's not that easy really. Several European countries have FISA s.702 functional equivalents that enable intelligence to get orders for interception of personal information on servers and entities within their legal jurisdiction. (e.g., The French Law on Intelligence and the German BND Act) It's easy to say that the US should just scrap s.702, but unless it's reciprocal with Europe scrapping their interception powers…

Hm. I was aware that French law was kind of awful on this, but never investigated the specifics. As, say, a non-EU person, would I be able to bring suit to a French court (and, if that fails, to the CJEU) regarding foreign-intelligence eavesdropping violating my privacy rights? (AFAIU the US answer is that if I’m a foreigner on foreign soil I don’t have any of those).

Re: Dutch DPA fines Uber €290M because of transfers of drivers’ data to the US

#289

Post by OKRainbowKid »

Auracle wrote: post #239
TeMPOraL wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Government spying on citizens is one thing. Companies is another. GDPR applies mostly to the latter, and in practice, today , most people in Europe aren't being harmed by their governments spying on them, but they are being harmed by private business abusing personal data.

I would much rather companies “spy” on me than the government.

I'd prefer if neither was the case. In the US, you can be certain that both are true.

Re: Dutch DPA fines Uber €290M because of transfers of drivers’ data to the US

#290

Post by blackeyeblitzar »

marcosdumay wrote: post #269
judge2020 wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only "safe" option without any uncertainty seems to be architect every system so that data never transits to the US and is also never in the custody of a subsidiary of a US-domiciled corporate parent. If i'm not mistaken, because of this (via[0]) > The CLOUD Act primarily amends the Stored Communications Act (SCA) of 1986 to allow federal law enforcement to compel U.S.-based technology companies via warrant or…

> which is insane It's completely sane from the EU's point of view. Why would they submit their citizens to forceful government eavesdrop? I do agree it's insane. But the insanity is not on the GDPR.

You mean like the EU governments? Which country / countries have fundamental protections for free speech and censorship free social media? Which are seeking to force encryption backdoors?
Post reply on HN