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

Facebook to change user terms, limiting effect of EU privacy law

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 409 posts

Re: Facebook to change user terms, limiting effect of EU privacy law

#321

Post by falcolas »

unethical_ban wrote: post #310
rmc wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So companies that are careless with personal data and get hacked get out of business? That sounds like a benefit! Within small companies, it's now easier to push for proper data security, for not being careless. "Boss, I know it'll slow down our release, but if we don't do it, we could go bankrupt!"

If I don't have a server in your country, I shouldn't be in your jurisdiction. And as for ANY regulation, progressive enforcement should be the norm. We shouldn't expect the same level of data security from John Buckley's local tool supply that we expect out of Amazon.

If you don't want to be in their jurisdiction, don't do business in their jurisdiction. If you do business in their country, why would you not be subject to their laws?

Re: Facebook to change user terms, limiting effect of EU privacy law

#322

Post by dogma1138 »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #317
dogma1138 wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No if you aren’t a legal entity in the EU you have no presence in the EU. If you would push for this the only thing that would happen is that companies would stop accepting orders from the EU. If this is going to be the definition expect a lot of store fronts to be closed to EU residents following May 25th or more likely the first time this precedence will be set in court.

It seems a direct parallel of being tried for copyright infringement in USA when you have an offshore website - like O'Dwyer who had to bribe himself out of being extradited from UK to face charges of copyright infringement in USA. He'd never been there, didn't have servers there, and was acting legally in his jurisdiction of residence. Similar things happened with USA's actions on Silk Road, KAT, with Kim Dotcom, an…

Copyright is enforced via local copyright holders / representatives, trade agreements and WTO rules AKA local or international law.

In no way shape or form does US law has a direct mandate outside of the US.

All the examples you've given were those of actions performed through established legal channels to which all parties had and have a saying in.

Extra-territorial application of the GDPR under existing frameworks (or the lack thereof) is tyrannical because you apply it to people that have had no saying in the establishment of the regulation and have no control over the interpretation and or the enforcement of it.

Re: Facebook to change user terms, limiting effect of EU privacy law

#324

Post by SmellyGeekBoy »

unethical_ban wrote: post #310
rmc wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So companies that are careless with personal data and get hacked get out of business? That sounds like a benefit! Within small companies, it's now easier to push for proper data security, for not being careless. "Boss, I know it'll slow down our release, but if we don't do it, we could go bankrupt!"

If I don't have a server in your country, I shouldn't be in your jurisdiction. And as for ANY regulation, progressive enforcement should be the norm. We shouldn't expect the same level of data security from John Buckley's local tool supply that we expect out of Amazon.

> If I don't have a server in your country, I shouldn't be in your jurisdiction.

Ha! Try telling that to the Americans ;)

Re: Facebook to change user terms, limiting effect of EU privacy law

#325

Post by dwild »

rmc wrote: post #297
sydd wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Furthermore, individuals are fully entitled to sue in the event of a data breach, and there is legal precedent in the EU for compensation of between 10-15k euro per person. This means that I can bankrupt small, careless companies that hold a few hundred users data?

So companies that are careless with personal data and get hacked get out of business? That sounds like a benefit! Within small companies, it's now easier to push for proper data security, for not being careless. "Boss, I know it'll slow down our release, but if we don't do it, we could go bankrupt!"

I'm from Quebec, I can nearly never play contest for a simple reason, if I win, they have to pay taxes over the winning for me. That's not much and the likelihood that I win is still low, yet that amount scared them enough to ignore me in most contest.

I feel like that's going to be more an incentive to ignore EU resident if the fees are that high. Even with a huge security budget, mistakes are made, is it worth it to risk that much cash? Check any gaming console, they have a pretty big incentive to keep the security pretty high, yet failed to do it so often.

Re: Facebook to change user terms, limiting effect of EU privacy law

#327

Post by SmellyGeekBoy »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #284
majewsky wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You absolutely can resign from the Armed Forces, otherwise how would there be veterans? The only difference is that you cannot resign mid-operation.

Veterans may have retired (different to resigning), or been demobilised (like being made redundant). You can't resign from conscription, some countries have a system whereby conscripts could serve non-combat roles; but usually it's fight or death/imprisonment. Apparently Germany had general conscription from 1935, but with lots of exceptions. By 1943 all men up to 60 were being conscripted. Follow orders or face a fi…

Very informative, but what does any of this have to do with Facebook?

Re: Facebook to change user terms, limiting effect of EU privacy law

#328

Post by thelastidiot »

mikekchar wrote: post #114

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…

It sounds like they are preparing themselves to the wave of EU class action law suits about privacy, that the US won't be able to do, by limiting the number of users under EU scrutiny. Haven't we seen that sort of move by Google earlier before they got slapped in the the same way facebook is probably going to be?

Re: Facebook to change user terms, limiting effect of EU privacy law

#329

Post by the_mitsuhiko »

dogma1138 wrote: post #268
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You get the courts that the person you're servicing uses. Like when you sell to someone in a particular country and have to abide by their sales and tax laws.

That’s not true on both accounts EU courts have no jurisdiction over non-EU entities and there is no process on how to arbitrate a lawful retention requirement which trumps GDPR between EU and none EU entities. As for the taxation part of your comment that is again an incorrect statement in fact it’s categoriclaly false. If I as say a Brazillian company want to sell goods to an EU resident I do not perform any tax co…

> As a non-EU entity I legally can not collect VAT on behalf of EU customers because I have no way of paying that tax on their behalf.

That’s not how this works. You are required to collect VAT and use the MOSS system to pay it quarterly.

Re: Facebook to change user terms, limiting effect of EU privacy law

#330

Post by pbhjpbhj »

SmellyGeekBoy wrote: post #327
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Veterans may have retired (different to resigning), or been demobilised (like being made redundant). You can't resign from conscription, some countries have a system whereby conscripts could serve non-combat roles; but usually it's fight or death/imprisonment. Apparently Germany had general conscription from 1935, but with lots of exceptions. By 1943 all men up to 60 were being conscripted. Follow orders or face a fi…

Very informative, but what does any of this have to do with Facebook?

It doesn't, it's background on a side-thread response to "just following orders". The reference to WWII Germany being because the usual origin is that this was used as a mitigation by those involved in the Wehrmacht.
Post reply on HN