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

€1.2B GDPR fine for Meta

noyb.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 68 posts

Re: €1.2B GDPR fine for Meta

#31

Post by jruohonen »

e98cuenc wrote: post #8
hunglee2 wrote: post #4

"The current conflict between EU privacy laws and US surveillance laws are also a problem for all other large US cloud providers, such as Microsoft, Google or Amazon" Globalised tech companies caught in the middle here, hard to see how they can continue to service global markets without a huge per-country localisation effort. Ones that could do it will increase cost (passed onto users of course), those that cannot wi…

I don't see how they can continue the service, even with huge localisation effort. The capital sin is to be a US company. That subjects them to US law, including CLOUD act, which the UE considers to be incompatible with privacy guarantees. Even if cloud providers use local datacenters they are still in "violation". If the US makes a data request using CLOUD act, they will have to comply, no matter where these servers…

To my understanding, the CLOUD Act is nothing like FISA already because it is about criminal law. Besides, the EU also recently enacted its own quite similar "e-evidence" law, and similar laws are pushed globally through the Budapest Convention. The biggest problem here probably is that the mutual legal assistance system is being replaced internationally by much more opaque practices. (And as for cyber crime, some major "players" are not participating.)

Re: €1.2B GDPR fine for Meta

#32

Post by vman81 »

e98cuenc wrote: post #8
hunglee2 wrote: post #4

"The current conflict between EU privacy laws and US surveillance laws are also a problem for all other large US cloud providers, such as Microsoft, Google or Amazon" Globalised tech companies caught in the middle here, hard to see how they can continue to service global markets without a huge per-country localisation effort. Ones that could do it will increase cost (passed onto users of course), those that cannot wi…

I don't see how they can continue the service, even with huge localisation effort. The capital sin is to be a US company. That subjects them to US law, including CLOUD act, which the UE considers to be incompatible with privacy guarantees. Even if cloud providers use local datacenters they are still in "violation". If the US makes a data request using CLOUD act, they will have to comply, no matter where these servers…

> which the UE considers to be incompatible with privacy guarantees.

Well, the whole "global jurisdiction" is iffy for the rest of the world.

Re: €1.2B GDPR fine for Meta

#33

Post by oaiey »

croes wrote: post #21
oaiey wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes indeed. If you do business in a country, adhere to the rules of this country. Simple. True globalization (one global rulebook) is a probably not to achieve, considering all the different aspects of societies in this world (degree of capitalism, degree of privacy, degree of social class responsibility, degree of liberal society, degree of ...). The G7 countries (aka US, EU, JP, Australia) are lucky to have a rough…

Not simple because the US CloudAct contradicts EU GDPR

Yes, correct. But that is something they can figure out.

Re: €1.2B GDPR fine for Meta

#34

Post by tephra »

ragebol wrote: post #23
0zemp2c wrote: post #18

[flagged]

What is so weird about having to adhere to the law? Can EU companies just ignore US law as well?

It's actually worse since the company that this opinion talks about is an _EU_ company (Meta platforms Ireland Limited). The fine is based on the global revenue but the company being targeted here, and the company that didn't follow EU laws, is an EU company.

Re: €1.2B GDPR fine for Meta

#35

Post by ahofmann »

ragebol wrote: post #23
0zemp2c wrote: post #18

[flagged]

What is so weird about having to adhere to the law? Can EU companies just ignore US law as well?

Exactly. When I'm doing anything with money here in Germany, like creating a bank account, or borrowing money, I have to answer multiple questions about me being a citizen of the USA or not. Why is that? Because everyone adheres to USA law. But this should work both ways.

Re: €1.2B GDPR fine for Meta

#36

Post by WA »

ahofmann wrote: post #35
ragebol wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is so weird about having to adhere to the law? Can EU companies just ignore US law as well?

Exactly. When I'm doing anything with money here in Germany, like creating a bank account, or borrowing money, I have to answer multiple questions about me being a citizen of the USA or not. Why is that? Because everyone adheres to USA law. But this should work both ways.

Good point, but not entirely true. It's not that Germans have to adhere to US law, but that US fines can be outrageously high and German institutions want to keep that risk in check. Insurance premiums are a lot higher if you do business with people from/selling to the US.

Re: €1.2B GDPR fine for Meta

#37

Post by M2Ys4U »

rmm wrote: post #30
matsemann wrote: post #11

> “It took us ten years of litigation against the Irish DPC to get to this result. We had to bring three procedures against the DPC and risked millions of procedural costs. The Irish regulator has done everything to avoid this decision, but was consistently overturned by the European Courts and institutions. It is kind of absurd that the record fine will go to Ireland - the EU Member State that did everything to ensu…

Wait. 10 years? So $120m/year fine? That’s a rounding error

The decision goes further than a fine, though. It orders Meta to stop transferring personal data of people in the EU to the US.

Re: €1.2B GDPR fine for Meta

#38

Post by mschuster91 »

M2Ys4U wrote: post #37
rmm wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait. 10 years? So $120m/year fine? That’s a rounding error

The decision goes further than a fine, though. It orders Meta to stop transferring personal data of people in the EU to the US.

How is this actually supposed to work in practice, other than sharding EU and non-EU customers and having them unable to communicate across the shards?

Re: €1.2B GDPR fine for Meta

#39

Post by black_puppydog »

The team at noyb is consistenaly amazing. Makes me really happy that I'm a card carrying member. (Yes, supporters get a plastic member card. It has no function afaict, but it's the one useless thing I carry in my wallet at all times, just so I can call myself a card-carrying member. It's the only such card I carry, for anything.)

Re: €1.2B GDPR fine for Meta

#40

Post by mschuster91 »

ahofmann wrote: post #35
ragebol wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is so weird about having to adhere to the law? Can EU companies just ignore US law as well?

Exactly. When I'm doing anything with money here in Germany, like creating a bank account, or borrowing money, I have to answer multiple questions about me being a citizen of the USA or not. Why is that? Because everyone adheres to USA law. But this should work both ways.

> When I'm doing anything with money here in Germany, like creating a bank account, or borrowing money, I have to answer multiple questions about me being a citizen of the USA or not. Why is that? Because everyone adheres to USA law.

Simple: the USA assumes global jurisdiction over anything involving the US dollar and they do not shy away from muscling over US-local branches of foreign companies to get their will.

Post reply on HN