4 ms·

All those confidently stating that GDPR applies to YC despite it not being a EU registered corporation are guessing at best. None of this has been tested in lit

All those confidently stating that GDPR applies to YC despite it not being a EU registered corporation are guessing at best. None of this has been tested in litigation by US courts. If US companies (without a EU legal/corporate presence) are beholden to EU law, then US companies are beholden the Chinese censorship laws

ggregoire 9y ago
I have to repeat the same response I already gave you: Makes no sense at all and the analogy with the Chinese censorship laws is really bad (not sure why I'm reading this analogy again and again on HN). GDPR holds on US businesses only for the EU users. If they don't have EU users they don't have to care about the GDPR. US businesses can have different set of rules for the US and EU market (that's what Facebook plans to do about the GDPR). The GDPR doesn't apply for the US market and the US users. Also US companies can limit their service to the US market if they don't agree with the GDPR.
- mankash666 9y ago
  I don't know why you confidently state these things as fact without presedence in litigation in US courts. US companies today that do not differentiate and demarcate their users based on location needn't start doing this, because the internet has no boundaries, and EU laws on EU citizens do not hold or apply to US companies that do not care for the location of the user within their service. Again - your opinions are just as valid as mine because there isn't a precedent in US (federal) courts. Stop pretending like your 'opinion' is fact
  - nemoniac 9y ago
    Why do you think that US (federal) courts have anything to say about this? It's an EU law governing companies holding data about EU citizens. It means that EU courts can rule over the activity of such companies, whether the companies come from the USA or elsewhere. Do you anticipate the EU wanting to test the GDPR in a US court? That would be as strange as the US choosing to test a US law in an EU court.
    - mankash666 9y ago
      Because US companies with no legal/corporate presence in the EU are ONLY bound by US law. Take the case of EFF vs Australian patent troll [1]. Though EFF was sued in Australian court under Australian law, it didn't matter because EFF was an American company. [1]: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/11/court-rules-effs-stupid-patent-month-post-protected-speech https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/11/court-rules-effs-stupi...
      - jakobegger 9y ago
        You can‘t extrapolate from one court case. We all agree that GDPR applies to companies that operate in the EU. Beyond that, there‘s a big uncertainty. Time will tell how the GDPR will be enforced with regard to companies that don‘t have a presence in the EU. My guess is that smaller ventures (like HN) are going to fly under the Radar, while bigger companies are going to comply.

ggregoire 9y ago

I have to repeat the same response I already gave you: Makes no sense at all and the analogy with the Chinese censorship laws is really bad (not sure why I'm reading this analogy again and again on HN). GDPR holds on US businesses only for the EU users. If they don't have EU users they don't have to care about the GDPR. US businesses can have different set of rules for the US and EU market (that's what Facebook plans to do about the GDPR). The GDPR doesn't apply for the US market and the US users. Also US companies can limit their service to the US market if they don't agree with the GDPR.

mankash666 9y ago
I don't know why you confidently state these things as fact without presedence in litigation in US courts. US companies today that do not differentiate and demarcate their users based on location needn't start doing this, because the internet has no boundaries, and EU laws on EU citizens do not hold or apply to US companies that do not care for the location of the user within their service. Again - your opinions are just as valid as mine because there isn't a precedent in US (federal) courts. Stop pretending like your 'opinion' is fact
- nemoniac 9y ago
  Why do you think that US (federal) courts have anything to say about this? It's an EU law governing companies holding data about EU citizens. It means that EU courts can rule over the activity of such companies, whether the companies come from the USA or elsewhere. Do you anticipate the EU wanting to test the GDPR in a US court? That would be as strange as the US choosing to test a US law in an EU court.
  - mankash666 9y ago
    Because US companies with no legal/corporate presence in the EU are ONLY bound by US law. Take the case of EFF vs Australian patent troll [1]. Though EFF was sued in Australian court under Australian law, it didn't matter because EFF was an American company. [1]: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/11/court-rules-effs-stupid-patent-month-post-protected-speech https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/11/court-rules-effs-stupi...
    - jakobegger 9y ago
      You can‘t extrapolate from one court case. We all agree that GDPR applies to companies that operate in the EU. Beyond that, there‘s a big uncertainty. Time will tell how the GDPR will be enforced with regard to companies that don‘t have a presence in the EU. My guess is that smaller ventures (like HN) are going to fly under the Radar, while bigger companies are going to comply.