3 ms·
I do not think this is an accurate analogy, specifically I do not think an Irish CEO would be violating the law, but in any case, most jurisdictions do not care
by Eridrus 9y ago
I do not think this is an accurate analogy, specifically I do not think an Irish CEO would be violating the law, but in any case, most jurisdictions do not care if you have placed yourself between a rock and a hard place legally and will operate as if no other jurisdictions exist; the main question is usually "can the US entity do what is being demanded"
- kobeya 9y agoThe Irish company would be violating Irish and/or EU law in this example. This is a reasonable analogy for what is happening in this Google case.
- yxhuvud 9y agoThe EU is not most jurisdictions and have put pretty hard rules in place. What you are saying is that you think that it is OK for a lowly judge to force all companies that deal in personal data to choose to either operate in the EU or in the USA. That is clearly not an optimal situation and will clearly have to be resolved, either by one side changing their rules or by a common agreement that voids GDPR for American courts.
- Eridrus 9y agoThis is not an optimal solution, which would be a negotiated agreement between the US and EU on how to reconcile the laws, but saying that doing what the court demands would put you in a hard spot of your own making isn't really a defense. On the off chance an agreement is reached with the EU I fully expect that they will allow law enforcement access from both jurisdictions; None of the EU laws restrain law enforcement in this regard. You can try and denigrate the judge all you want, but they have the authority to make these demands, and your only recourse is the supreme court or congress. Laws are a cost of doing business in the US.