4 ms·

Unless the business can show that private data is necessery for good service which it is as data brings more revenue, and more revenue enables good service. So

Unless the business can show that private data is necessery for good service which it is as data brings more revenue, and more revenue enables good service. So a user would have two options: 1. Disagree, pay with money, 2. Agree, pay with private data. All looks GDPR-compliant.

PeterisP 9y ago
No, that's simply not true - the exemption is if the data needs to be used to actually do the service right now. Quoting the actual directive, "processing is necessary for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is party"; there's no "good service" there, nor future improvements of that service, nor sustained profitable operation of the company. And "necessary" means just that; if you physically can perform the contract without this data, then the data is not legally necessary even if you'd go bankrupt if everyone did that. This exemption covers things like storing your address for deliveries of goods, a messaging app storing your contact info, instagram storing your photos - things where that data is inherently needed to execute that service. Data can be helpful to improve some recommendations that will make service better in the future - fine, the users can opt-in and some will do that; but that's not an automatic justification to use that data; Data can be helpful to support the future development your service with revenue - fine, the users can opt-in and some will do that (i.e. many people turn off adblockers and give patreon funding to services they like), but again, that's not going to be legal justification to use data of those who don't want to. There are a bunch of other exemptions where you can use that data without consent (compliance with other legal requirements, overriding public interest as in e.g. press about public officials), but "I need money to continue operating" is not among them. GDPR is intended to solve the conflict between "I don't want to provide data" vs "I need data-based revenue to continue operating" in the favor of users. If you really do need that data based revenue to operate, then the users can "vote" (by opt-in) whether they consider your continued operation valuable enough to hand over their data voluntarily.
- wtfstatists 9y ago
  From recent official clarification (dated 28 Nov 2017) http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/document.cfm?doc_id=48849 http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/document.cfm?doc_id=48849 [Example 1] A mobile app for photo editing asks its users to have their GPS localisation activated for the use of its services. The app also tells its users it will use the collected data for behavioural advertising purposes. Neither geo-localisation or online behavioural advertising are necessary for the provision of the photo editing service andgo beyond the delivery of the core service provided. Since users cannot use the app without consenting to thesepurposes, the consent cannot be considered as being freely given. [Example 6] A bank asks customers for consent to use their payment details for marketing purposes. This processing activity is not necessary for the performance of the contract with the customer and the delivery of ordinary bank account services. If the customer’s refusal to consent to this processing purpose would lead to the denial of banking services, closure of the bank account, or an increase of the fee, consent cannot be freely given or revoked. You appear to be right. GDPR effectively bans targeted ads in EU which means a significant source of revenue, enough to be fatal, is now illegal. It seems to me that EU does not like private data as payment. I wish good luck to citzens and businesses cause I certainly wouldnt/couldnt, as a business, provide EU.
  - x0x0 9y ago
    It doesn't ban targeted ads; it merely requires a business to individually and clearly ask permission. ie can we use locations services to: ▯ localize where you took a photo ▯ show you ads is legitimate consent
    - wtfstatists 9y ago
      Which many wont. Yet business still have to provide same service as someone who has. Cost remains same but now profit reduced drastically. Thus its not economical to provide to EU. IMO this demands more attention from HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16314101 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16314101

PeterisP 9y ago

No, that's simply not true - the exemption is if the data needs to be used to actually do the service right now. Quoting the actual directive, "processing is necessary for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is party"; there's no "good service" there, nor future improvements of that service, nor sustained profitable operation of the company. And "necessary" means just that; if you physically can perform the contract without this data, then the data is not legally necessary even if you'd go bankrupt if everyone did that. This exemption covers things like storing your address for deliveries of goods, a messaging app storing your contact info, instagram storing your photos - things where that data is inherently needed to execute that service. Data can be helpful to improve some recommendations that will make service better in the future - fine, the users can opt-in and some will do that; but that's not an automatic justification to use that data; Data can be helpful to support the future development your service with revenue - fine, the users can opt-in and some will do that (i.e. many people turn off adblockers and give patreon funding to services they like), but again, that's not going to be legal justification to use data of those who don't want to. There are a bunch of other exemptions where you can use that data without consent (compliance with other legal requirements, overriding public interest as in e.g. press about public officials), but "I need money to continue operating" is not among them. GDPR is intended to solve the conflict between "I don't want to provide data" vs "I need data-based revenue to continue operating" in the favor of users. If you really do need that data based revenue to operate, then the users can "vote" (by opt-in) whether they consider your continued operation valuable enough to hand over their data voluntarily.

wtfstatists 9y ago
From recent official clarification (dated 28 Nov 2017) http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/document.cfm?doc_id=48849 http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/document.cfm?doc_id=48849 [Example 1] A mobile app for photo editing asks its users to have their GPS localisation activated for the use of its services. The app also tells its users it will use the collected data for behavioural advertising purposes. Neither geo-localisation or online behavioural advertising are necessary for the provision of the photo editing service andgo beyond the delivery of the core service provided. Since users cannot use the app without consenting to thesepurposes, the consent cannot be considered as being freely given. [Example 6] A bank asks customers for consent to use their payment details for marketing purposes. This processing activity is not necessary for the performance of the contract with the customer and the delivery of ordinary bank account services. If the customer’s refusal to consent to this processing purpose would lead to the denial of banking services, closure of the bank account, or an increase of the fee, consent cannot be freely given or revoked. You appear to be right. GDPR effectively bans targeted ads in EU which means a significant source of revenue, enough to be fatal, is now illegal. It seems to me that EU does not like private data as payment. I wish good luck to citzens and businesses cause I certainly wouldnt/couldnt, as a business, provide EU.
- x0x0 9y ago
  It doesn't ban targeted ads; it merely requires a business to individually and clearly ask permission. ie can we use locations services to: ▯ localize where you took a photo ▯ show you ads is legitimate consent
  - wtfstatists 9y ago
    Which many wont. Yet business still have to provide same service as someone who has. Cost remains same but now profit reduced drastically. Thus its not economical to provide to EU. IMO this demands more attention from HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16314101 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16314101