4 ms·

Companies cannot sue over GDPR violations (neither can individuals). People can report violations to the GDPR watchdogs who will investigate and could eventuall

by midasz 8y ago

Companies cannot sue over GDPR violations (neither can individuals). People can report violations to the GDPR watchdogs who will investigate and could eventually hand out fines.

ozim 8y ago
I think you actually can sue for whatever reason you like but court can say it does not make sense and they will not run the case. It is your responsibility to get enough evidence but it is hard and no one cares enough. If your data was used without your knowledge you might have had some damage and you could request compensation, removal or other way of fixing damage - with court help of course. GDPR violations can be used as base for court case. So GDPR does not really bring anything new because I believe you already could sue companies for selling your data, but in practice it is not possible to get evidence, prove damage, put price on damage, and it takes too long. What changes is that if you don't have all data usages listed for user to view it is enough for some action so offended users can suspect something. If watchdog goes and checks you might be in problem with fines and then with court cases from offended users.
- Someone 8y ago
  ”I think you actually can sue for whatever reason you like but court can say it does not make sense and they will not run the case.” True. ”It is your responsibility to get enough evidence but it is hard and no one cares enough.” In this case, every “doesn’t comply with the GDPR” case a company starts will be immediately dismissed because: a) you can’t start a lawsuit on the GDPR. The only way is through a national data protection authority. b) even if you could, companies wouldn’t be interested parties in such a case. (By the way, I think the national data protection authorities are the sore spot in the GDPR. I don’t think it is good that they are both prosecutor, jury, and executioner)
  - ozim 8y ago
    I would think of scenario: "I received unsolicited marketing information from company X, with contact information which was obtained from company Y. I did not agree on sharing my information by company Y. My wife noticed I receive 'grow my manly parts' advertisements from company X. Because of this she concluded I am cheating on her and requested divorce. For such humiliation I request company Y to reimburse damages. Noted by protection authority AU, company Y did not comply to GDPR."
    - Someone 8y ago
      I am not a lawyer, but I don’t think that would fall under prosecuting under the GDPR. If a speeding car driver hits and injures you, you aren’t going to try and sue him for speeding, either, are you? You probably would sue under something like “Reckless behavior causing injury” (with the bonus that that even is possible if the driver wasn’t speeding)
frockington 8y ago
So google (or whoever) can just tell stonewall investigators and/or inform them they are GDPR compliant and that's good enough? Are the investigators going to be allowed to examine intellectual property? Sorry for all the questions I am failing to see how this will be able to be enforced

by midasz 8y ago

Companies cannot sue over GDPR violations (neither can individuals). People can report violations to the GDPR watchdogs who will investigate and could eventually hand out fines.

ozim 8y ago

I think you actually can sue for whatever reason you like but court can say it does not make sense and they will not run the case. It is your responsibility to get enough evidence but it is hard and no one cares enough. If your data was used without your knowledge you might have had some damage and you could request compensation, removal or other way of fixing damage - with court help of course. GDPR violations can be used as base for court case. So GDPR does not really bring anything new because I believe you already could sue companies for selling your data, but in practice it is not possible to get evidence, prove damage, put price on damage, and it takes too long. What changes is that if you don't have all data usages listed for user to view it is enough for some action so offended users can suspect something. If watchdog goes and checks you might be in problem with fines and then with court cases from offended users.

Someone 8y ago
”I think you actually can sue for whatever reason you like but court can say it does not make sense and they will not run the case.” True. ”It is your responsibility to get enough evidence but it is hard and no one cares enough.” In this case, every “doesn’t comply with the GDPR” case a company starts will be immediately dismissed because: a) you can’t start a lawsuit on the GDPR. The only way is through a national data protection authority. b) even if you could, companies wouldn’t be interested parties in such a case. (By the way, I think the national data protection authorities are the sore spot in the GDPR. I don’t think it is good that they are both prosecutor, jury, and executioner)
- ozim 8y ago
  I would think of scenario: "I received unsolicited marketing information from company X, with contact information which was obtained from company Y. I did not agree on sharing my information by company Y. My wife noticed I receive 'grow my manly parts' advertisements from company X. Because of this she concluded I am cheating on her and requested divorce. For such humiliation I request company Y to reimburse damages. Noted by protection authority AU, company Y did not comply to GDPR."
  - Someone 8y ago
    I am not a lawyer, but I don’t think that would fall under prosecuting under the GDPR. If a speeding car driver hits and injures you, you aren’t going to try and sue him for speeding, either, are you? You probably would sue under something like “Reckless behavior causing injury” (with the bonus that that even is possible if the driver wasn’t speeding)

frockington 8y ago

So google (or whoever) can just tell stonewall investigators and/or inform them they are GDPR compliant and that's good enough? Are the investigators going to be allowed to examine intellectual property? Sorry for all the questions I am failing to see how this will be able to be enforced