How come The Netherlands does not appear in the list?
GDPR Enforcement Tracker: List of GDPR fines
291–300 of 301 posts
Re: GDPR Enforcement Tracker: List of GDPR fines
#292Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is almost always a button for manually triggering a recording.
Is that legal in Austria?
Shouldn't be any more illegal than recording something with your cellphone (when not in the car) that you are interested with. I'm not quite certain about the legal code in australia but private recordings should generally be exempt from a lot of things.
Re: GDPR Enforcement Tracker: List of GDPR fines
#293Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does . mean?
It is used for several purposes, the most frequent of which is to mark the end of a declaratory sentence. (why are we doing this?)
I thought English uses PERIOD to verbally mark the end of a declaratory sentence, not DOT. That's probably where the confusion comes from.
Re: GDPR Enforcement Tracker: List of GDPR fines
#294Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is used for several purposes, the most frequent of which is to mark the end of a declaratory sentence. (why are we doing this?)
I thought English uses PERIOD to verbally mark the end of a declaratory sentence, not DOT. That's probably where the confusion comes from.
I should have written "period".
Re: GDPR Enforcement Tracker: List of GDPR fines
#295A was curious about the dashcam fine so I looked it up and it seems some vary ordinary usages of cameras are violating GDPR:
> It was a camera recording the use of a car from the driver's point of view, which is illegal. Two people were reprimanded for using surveillance cameras for their own home without permission.
I assume "driver's point of view" means looking out of the front windshield? Is this not how dash cams are meant to be used? (On second though perhaps this is a translation issue... the article was in German). And then I assume the surveillance cameras were mounted outside and recorded people in public?
Both of the possible scenarios here seem pretty benign and ordinary by US standards.
Re: GDPR Enforcement Tracker: List of GDPR fines
#296Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, I assume that recording in public spaces is illegal in general and they make a specific exception to allow dash cams on the conditions mentioned?
The general consensus in the german legal system is that a dashcam that records on loop is not allowed; you basically film people without their consent and with the intent to distribute to third parties (the police) for no good reason (the possibility of a crash). On the other hand, what is permitted is dashcams with shock sensors and trigger buttons. The shock sensor gives you a good reason (very high probability of…
Do these specialized dashcams keep a buffer? Otherwise it seems both the shock and trigger button would activate too late to capture the moments before the 'crash' which typically are more important for determining the cause.
Re: GDPR Enforcement Tracker: List of GDPR fines
#297Earlier quoted context omitted.
The general consensus in the german legal system is that a dashcam that records on loop is not allowed; you basically film people without their consent and with the intent to distribute to third parties (the police) for no good reason (the possibility of a crash). On the other hand, what is permitted is dashcams with shock sensors and trigger buttons. The shock sensor gives you a good reason (very high probability of…
Do these specialized dashcams keep a buffer? Otherwise it seems both the shock and trigger button would activate too late to capture the moments before the 'crash' which typically are more important for determining the cause.
There is usually a buffer, how much depends on the camera.
Re: GDPR Enforcement Tracker: List of GDPR fines
#298Earlier quoted context omitted.
You went on and on about some tedious point and kept doing it long after it was clear no productive discussion would take place. Also, you've done this many times before on this particular topic. I don't have a way to stop you from doing that other than banning you, and I don't want to ban you. But if you can't or won't stop doing this, we're going to have to. So would you please stop doing this?
I am not sure how I was supposed to know, in advance, that “no productive discussion would take place”. I only mentioned facts, not my own opinions, so the outlandishly negative reaction was not predictable. It seems that I am being held to a different standard than others, because now I am supposed to somehow correctly forecast the reaction of people to factual information before I post it, or risk being banned. I d…
You don't need to predict that, just have the discretion not to keep feeding an argument once it has become repetitive and unproductive.
I meant that we marked it off-topic internally in our system, not that that would be visible publicly. Sorry for the confusion.
Re: GDPR Enforcement Tracker: List of GDPR fines
#299Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing is if this was a civil case you have to prove some damages had be done by the leak. A random person leaking my email in CC - that happens a lot - is not even necessarily annoying but for sure don't cause any damages.
But how is that different from any of the other privacy violations that are regulated? I doubt many of us could prove any damages from Amazon listening in on conversations made by our kids, or Google not properly disclosing that its tracking our search clicks and GPS location for better ad targeting. In fact, I'd argue that leaking an email that exposes a private association with a mailing list to other unknown peopl…
+1. Privacy violations sure do cause damages, they're just very difficult to attribute. When someone suffers identity theft, which ones of the dozens of leaking sieves with their data most enabled it?
Re: GDPR Enforcement Tracker: List of GDPR fines
#300Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Seems we were right. Arguably, and so far . There are sites that just block requests from the EU, there's a difficult-to-measure chilling effect on small businesses, and just because nobody's been hanged over it in year one doesn't mean it won't be abused, oppressive, or have other negative unintended consequences in the future.
> There are sites that just block requests from the EU The only sites that I've seen with this are local US news sites that don't even have to follow GDPR.
Could you elaborate on why you think they do not have to follow GDPR? Do you think they can continue to track all their visitors as before, including the odd EU citizen?