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

Deletion of user account

soflow.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 117 posts

Re: Deletion of user account

#91

Post by EMIRELADERO »

berkes wrote: post #72
SushiHippie wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://gdpr-info.eu/art-17-gdpr/

IANAL, but I don't see any requirement of it having to be "free". I probably miss something. And It would seem very much against the spirit, but is a company really not allowed to charge fees for "deleting"?

EU courts enforce the spirit of the law as well, not just the letter. It's called "teleological interpretation".

Re: Deletion of user account

#92

Post by saintfire »

sebastianconcpt wrote: post #45
dumbfounder wrote: post #33

Nice, if you register you can get 10% off your deletion: https://paste.pics/59a50e49166a7c584f7e656391346329

Okay but then how can marketeers do that and still go to heaven?

What do you mean? They save you 10%. What more do you want?

Re: Deletion of user account

#93

Post by [deleted] »

oefrha wrote: post #37
grilledchickenw wrote: post #4

The wayback machine will always remember: https://web.archive.org/web/20240503105207/https://www.soflo...

It doesn’t. You can block their crawler with robots.txt and send DMCA takedown requests for archived pages as the domain owner which they will honor. Edit: I was under the wrong impression that if you specifically call out ia_archiver in robots.txt they would honor it. It’s been completely ignored since 2017.

[deleted]

Re: Deletion of user account

#94

Post by yreg »

BTW there are European banks that have fees for account closure (and for cancelling credit/debit cards; and for stopping standing payment orders; and maybe for cancelling SEPA mandates).

Re: Deletion of user account

#95

Post by lupire »

oaiey wrote: post #77
gregjw wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say so, yes. Right to deletion is a thing.

Administrative Processing Fees are a thing of GDPR. In most cases, however, this should not be a applicable for something as simple as an SQL statement from a button.

Why is it legal to charge if they don't manually, but not of they do up front work to automate it? That would create an incentive to not automate, which would be a chilling effect.

Re: Deletion of user account

#96

Post by rcarmo »

I've been playing with this and have a few of them in my cart:

Total € 183.545.103.533.410.025.472,00

They apparently don't do live stock availability checks :)

Re: Deletion of user account

#98

Post by dkjaudyeqooe »

rcarmo wrote: post #96

I've been playing with this and have a few of them in my cart: Total € 183.545.103.533.410.025.472,00 They apparently don't do live stock availability checks :)

Keep on going until it overflows and sets the sign bit, then they'll credit your card with quintillions of euros.

Re: Deletion of user account

#99

Post by Aaargh20318 »

ricardo81 wrote: post #21
rob137 wrote: post #5

Still seeing it here: https://www.soflow.com/en/product/deletion-of-user-account/

Interesting links, In the UK it's showing the initial link as costing £ 29,90. 'rip off Britain' I guess.

Probably to pay for import duties due to brexit. Not sue what the duty on account deletion is nowadays.

Re: Deletion of user account

#100

Post by anonzzzies »

dathinab wrote: post #69
anonzzzies wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s meant to take on the large/multiple offenders; if they get enough complaints about 1 company and after warnings that company doesn’t change, they will fine.

they could fine without warning and IMHO they should start doing so it's the law isn't new isn't complicated to roughly get right for 99% of companies so there is no longer reason to go easy on companies which seem to very knowingly give a shit (independently of weather it actually was knowingly)

That would make it more like the US with over litigation, companies hiring people to find competitors in violation and going by the letter instead of the intent of the law. Also; the gdpr is large and complex but the intent is pretty clear; if we start to go by the letter, very many companies are unknowingly in violation but cannot afford consultants. They don’t abuse the data ; they just store too much for instance. It would be very strange if they get fined immediately; they will have 0 complaints over their existence probably, so a warning would suffice.

The companies that don’t give a shit aka ignore warnings from the overseer in their country, will get fined; small or big. It works fine.

Post reply on HN