3 ms·
He is meeting the required standards... by not having an EU users. In doing that he's as equally compliant as any company who has jumped through the various GD
by dageshi 8y ago
He is meeting the required standards... by not having an EU users.
In doing that he's as equally compliant as any company who has jumped through the various GDPR hoops.
- jacquesm 8y agoAnd has made his business that much less viable, and opened himself up to competition from a company with a comparable product that does comply with the law. And maybe one day the USA will pass some privacy legislation...
- dageshi 8y agoI'm not actually sure he is running this as a business? It seems open source? He even suggests people download and build their own? So all he's done is save himself the time and effort of dealing with the GDPR and cost himself nothing.
- jacquesm 8y agoThe fact that it is open source does not mean it isn't a business. And yes, he has saved himself the time and the effort of dealing with the GDPR, has also managed to position himself as someone who pays lipservice to privacy but who does not care to actually be compliant with privacy legislation when it matters. I wouldn't want my data in his hands after that anyway (not that that would ever happen because I don't have a smartphone in the first place).
- enedil 8y agoFrom my POV, he definitely positioned himself as someone that doesn't give a damn about user privacy
- orangecat 8y agoThat's ridiculous, and the same non-logic as "anyone who declines to let the police search their home without a warrant is trying to hide something illegal". In both cases there is no upside and a chance of a large downside, even when you're completely innocent.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- bdcravens 8y ago> opened himself up to competition from a company with a comparable product that does comply with the law I'm sure another free and open source product will seriously impact his profit.