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

GDPR: Removing Monal from the EU

monal.im

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

831–840 of 957 posts

Re: GDPR: Removing Monal from the EU

#831

Post by jashmatthews »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #761
jashmatthews wrote: post #749

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EU law doesn't work like that. Each country has to pass their own local law to enforce the GDPR. For the UK that was the Data Protection Bill 2017.

From wikipedia: The GDPR replaces the 1995 Data Protection Directive.[4] Because the GDPR is a regulation, not a directive, it does not require national governments to pass any enabling legislation and is directly binding and applicable.[5] So, no local laws. It's a regulation.

It's an EU Regulation, which under EU law the local courts have a duty to enforce. Local courts and laws will be dealing with all the details unless a case is appealed to ECJ.

To say that local courts and laws will have no influence is complete rubbish.

Re: GDPR: Removing Monal from the EU

#832

Post by jashmatthews »

jotaen wrote: post #796
YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #761

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From wikipedia: The GDPR replaces the 1995 Data Protection Directive.[4] Because the GDPR is a regulation, not a directive, it does not require national governments to pass any enabling legislation and is directly binding and applicable.[5] So, no local laws. It's a regulation.

Only for the sake of correctness/completeness: GDPR does allow member states to adjust certain details to bring them in line with local regulations (see Chapter 9). These are explicit opening clauses though that must not basically weaken or augment GDPR.

It's more complex than that. Different countries might pass different laws about interpretation, and both are valid until there's an ECJ decision.

Re: GDPR: Removing Monal from the EU

#833

Post by e12e »

Angostura wrote: post #687
kingofhdds wrote: post #660

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>this guy sees the law and runs off without even trying to become compliant This guy quite clearly states that he doesn't have resources to become compliant, while it is too risky to make a mistake here. There are fans of GDPR on this website, who prefer to ignore the fact that the compliance has its cost, and added to that still unknown risks of practical interpretation of legislation which also have their cost. But…

I respect his right to do whatever he would like with his own hobby, but we should be clear that the guy is stating he doesn’t have the resources, based on a series of misunderstandings. So, for example, he says he is required to appoint a DPO. The U.K. Information Commissioner has this to say: >Do we need to appoint a Data Protection Officer? A> Under the GDPR, you must appoint a DPO if: > you are a public authority…

Perhaps more important, dpo is just another hat - if he's ceo,cfo,cto - he can be dpo too?

Re: GDPR: Removing Monal from the EU

#835

Post by e12e »

product50 wrote: post #404
jacquesm wrote: post #273

This is a ridiculous over-reaction based on an extremely shallow interpretation of the GDPR. If you are running a small business and you feel that you won't be able to operate your business because of the GDPR consider all those other laws that you have to be in compliance with as well. If that's your attitude towards legal compliance then you should probably shut your business down completely rather than to hope tha…

He is a 1 person team. Given him a break vs. being so aggressive in your comment. There is a cost associated with trying to figure out GDPR regulations, finding a lawyer, vetting their feedback, acting to hire folks, changing UI to give user an opt out, implementing that in the system etc. All these things don't drop from the sky. And they are a business. And as a business they have decided to get out of Europe as th…

> changing UI to give user an opt out

Opt out is illegal under the GDPR - it needs to be opt in.

Re: GDPR: Removing Monal from the EU

#836

Post by shaftoe »

optimalKEK wrote: post #419
jacquesm wrote: post #273

This is a ridiculous over-reaction based on an extremely shallow interpretation of the GDPR. If you are running a small business and you feel that you won't be able to operate your business because of the GDPR consider all those other laws that you have to be in compliance with as well. If that's your attitude towards legal compliance then you should probably shut your business down completely rather than to hope tha…

Thanks for clearing that up - I can't stand people who think they are above the law. Here in France and Germany, this law is creating a lot of jobs too. I hope more laws like that in the future so that even more jobs can be created. I love the EU :-)

I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not, so I'll pretend it's not.

This is the broken window fallacy. You're not creating jobs, you're destroying wealth.

Re: GDPR: Removing Monal from the EU

#837

Post by EamonnMR »

fcbrooklyn wrote: post #424
jacquesm wrote: post #273

This is a ridiculous over-reaction based on an extremely shallow interpretation of the GDPR. If you are running a small business and you feel that you won't be able to operate your business because of the GDPR consider all those other laws that you have to be in compliance with as well. If that's your attitude towards legal compliance then you should probably shut your business down completely rather than to hope tha…

It is impossible to sell raw-milk cheese in the United States. Are French cheese makers overreacting by simply choosing not to do business here rather than change their centuries-old production techniques? It is illegal to sell kinder eggs in the US, because of some law that involves children accidentally swallowing toys. Is Kinder overreacting by refusing to sell those candies here? You cannot buy Bovril in the US,…

I have good news for you about kinder eggs: they're no longer banned.[1] There's a store in Harvard Square that has about twenty different kinds. Sadly, they appear to be all licensed stuff now.

https://www.npr.org/2017/05/26/530257536/after-being-banned-...

Re: GDPR: Removing Monal from the EU

#838

Post by C4stor »

CaptainZapp wrote: post #671
fcbrooklyn wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bovril could easily comply. They would simply have to open a manufacturing facility that did not use UK beef. The French cheese makers could sort of comply, by pasteurizing their milk. Kinder, I admit, has a more difficult problem, and has, in fact attempted to comply, by creating a completely different product with the same name.

"The French cheese makers could sort of comply, by pasteurizing their milk" And why should the French cripple a delicious and traditional product, which is gladly gobbled up by millions of happy consumers to sell their product in the US?

You mean, exactly what we are doing right now, causing all kind of outrage in France ? Funny you should bring that up, because it's a very hot topic currently :-D

Re: GDPR: Removing Monal from the EU

#839

Post by lovich »

jimmaswell wrote: post #622
brandonjm wrote: post #606

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> only a tiny percentage of users give consent Implying that the majority of user's wouldn't just instantly click the largest button that says "make this annoying wall of legal text go away" whether that is agreeing to tracking or not? While the inability to target ads based on data about you and your search history searches removes some amount of advertising income. Websites would still be allowed to show ads, and I…

"The study, which looked at ads run on member networks during 2009, showed that among users who clicked on a behaviorally targeted ad, 6.8% converted. That compared with only 2.8% of those who clicked on a run-of-network ad." https://www.emarketer.com/Article/Behavioral-Targeting-Doubl...

No one's arguing that the targeted ads don't make more money. We are arguing that the extra value from the ads is not worth violating everyone's privacy.

Re: GDPR: Removing Monal from the EU

#840

Post by krfsm »

e12e wrote: post #833
Angostura wrote: post #687

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I respect his right to do whatever he would like with his own hobby, but we should be clear that the guy is stating he doesn’t have the resources, based on a series of misunderstandings. So, for example, he says he is required to appoint a DPO. The U.K. Information Commissioner has this to say: >Do we need to appoint a Data Protection Officer? A> Under the GDPR, you must appoint a DPO if: > you are a public authority…

Perhaps more important, dpo is just another hat - if he's ceo,cfo,cto - he can be dpo too?

There are limitations, namely:

"There must not be a conflict of interest between the duties of the individual as a DPO and her other duties, if any."

Specifically they recommend against also being the data controller. I.e. you shouldn't be responsible both for handling personal data and verifying compliance of said handling.

Post reply on HN