3 ms·

He said the site does not make money. So why would he spend more of his time to make the changes needed to be compliant? That said, I think the fear of no win,

He said the site does not make money. So why would he spend more of his time to make the changes needed to be compliant? That said, I think the fear of no win, no fee legal firms is a little overblown. You can't get blood out of a turnip and if he's not making money there's no reason any law firm would be interested in suing him.

lucb1e 9y ago
> He said the site does not make money. So why would he spend more of his time to make the changes needed to be compliant? I'm honestly wondering what the law previously said regarding data protection. The Dutch WBP from 2001 already covers everything that he would have to do under GDPR given this website, so unless the UK has some very weird laws (or unless we're weird), nothing would change. Perhaps an extra tickbox on signing up that says "yeah yeah I'm really very aware that my data is shared with third parties". Most likely, this is a good excuse to go "I refuse to read the long legalese [even if it's 95% the same as before] and I'm just going to quit this loss-turning website without the community turning sour on me because I have a good excuse".
- mikekchar 9y ago
  The main difference is that you have to tell people ahead of time what you are going to do with the data and what lawful basis you are going to use to justify that usage. Later you can't change your mind. Additionally, you have to record what you have previously told people (so you can say, "On this date we informed you that we would use the data in this way, are we are doing so"). One other potential difference is that you need to be able to inform the user specifically with which 3rd parties you have shared the information. Generally speaking, I think most sites will require some additional development work to update their UI and to store the data. If you have been compliant with the previous laws then it should be no problem. One wrinkle is that in the previous laws there was no way for your customer to find out if you were following the law or not (without suing you). With GDPR they have a right to both be notified what you plan to do and the right to request evidence that you are following that plan. There will be many companies that will have to alter their processes significantly to account for this.
- freeone3000 9y ago
  It's very likely that the site is non-compliant with Dutch law.
  - lucb1e 9y ago
    I just mentioned the Dutch variant because I know of it and since both counties are in the EU, laws are typically very similar. I'm wondering if he was compliant with whatever the current (pre-GDPR) UK law is.
- pbowyer 9y ago
  > I'm honestly wondering what the law previously said regarding data protection. In the businesses I'm working with, I'm finding the biggest problems with GDPR aren't with GDPR - they're because the business wasn't compliant with the UK's Data Protection Act (1998). So the pain is the scramble to catch up.
fcbrooklyn 9y ago
He said the _site_ doesn't make money. He might make or have money from any number of other sources.
- pishpash 9y ago
  Should have incorporated to insulate himself then.
Barrin92 9y ago
>He said the site does not make money. So why would he spend more of his time to make the changes needed to be compliant? I think you could ask that question about all the other formalities you have to engage in as well if you run a business? Managing his taxes probably takes more time than making that kind of business GDPR compliant
- ams6110 9y ago
  I haven't seen his tax return of course, but perhaps he's not running it as a "business" at all. From the sounds of things it was a side project and could easily be classified as a hobby even if it were generating a little income.
hannasanarion 9y ago
Especially since gdpr doesn't allow individuals to sue, only regulators, so the fear is bogus in the first place
ehsankia 9y ago
If I was a competing site, but which charged the user, I sure as hell would be incentivized to take down my competitor that is free.

lucb1e 9y ago

> He said the site does not make money. So why would he spend more of his time to make the changes needed to be compliant? I'm honestly wondering what the law previously said regarding data protection. The Dutch WBP from 2001 already covers everything that he would have to do under GDPR given this website, so unless the UK has some very weird laws (or unless we're weird), nothing would change. Perhaps an extra tickbox on signing up that says "yeah yeah I'm really very aware that my data is shared with third parties". Most likely, this is a good excuse to go "I refuse to read the long legalese [even if it's 95% the same as before] and I'm just going to quit this loss-turning website without the community turning sour on me because I have a good excuse".

mikekchar 9y ago
The main difference is that you have to tell people ahead of time what you are going to do with the data and what lawful basis you are going to use to justify that usage. Later you can't change your mind. Additionally, you have to record what you have previously told people (so you can say, "On this date we informed you that we would use the data in this way, are we are doing so"). One other potential difference is that you need to be able to inform the user specifically with which 3rd parties you have shared the information. Generally speaking, I think most sites will require some additional development work to update their UI and to store the data. If you have been compliant with the previous laws then it should be no problem. One wrinkle is that in the previous laws there was no way for your customer to find out if you were following the law or not (without suing you). With GDPR they have a right to both be notified what you plan to do and the right to request evidence that you are following that plan. There will be many companies that will have to alter their processes significantly to account for this.
freeone3000 9y ago
It's very likely that the site is non-compliant with Dutch law.
- lucb1e 9y ago
  I just mentioned the Dutch variant because I know of it and since both counties are in the EU, laws are typically very similar. I'm wondering if he was compliant with whatever the current (pre-GDPR) UK law is.
pbowyer 9y ago
> I'm honestly wondering what the law previously said regarding data protection. In the businesses I'm working with, I'm finding the biggest problems with GDPR aren't with GDPR - they're because the business wasn't compliant with the UK's Data Protection Act (1998). So the pain is the scramble to catch up.

fcbrooklyn 9y ago

He said the _site_ doesn't make money. He might make or have money from any number of other sources.

pishpash 9y ago
Should have incorporated to insulate himself then.

Barrin92 9y ago

>He said the site does not make money. So why would he spend more of his time to make the changes needed to be compliant? I think you could ask that question about all the other formalities you have to engage in as well if you run a business? Managing his taxes probably takes more time than making that kind of business GDPR compliant

ams6110 9y ago
I haven't seen his tax return of course, but perhaps he's not running it as a "business" at all. From the sounds of things it was a side project and could easily be classified as a hobby even if it were generating a little income.

hannasanarion 9y ago

Especially since gdpr doesn't allow individuals to sue, only regulators, so the fear is bogus in the first place

ehsankia 9y ago

If I was a competing site, but which charged the user, I sure as hell would be incentivized to take down my competitor that is free.