4 ms·

"cost of producing the data" seems really hard to strictly define. What's stopping a company from implementing extremely tedious procedures and billing $100 an

by d4l3k 8y ago

"cost of producing the data" seems really hard to strictly define. What's stopping a company from implementing extremely tedious procedures and billing $100 an hour to discourage people from requesting it? In addition, GPDR says that getting access to data on you is a right and it seems contradictory to have to pay for something that is your right to have.

AnthonyMouse 8y ago
> "cost of producing the data" seems really hard to strictly define. What's stopping a company from implementing extremely tedious procedures and billing $100 an hour to discourage people from requesting it? Government agencies have been known to do this when they don't want to release FIOA information. Then they get sued over it by the ACLU or similar. > In addition, GPDR says that getting access to data on you is a right and it seems contradictory to have to pay for something that is your right to have. That is how all the other rights work. Freedom of the press isn't a right to use someone else's printing press without compensating them.
- ttoinou 8y ago
  access to data on you is a right Freedom of the press isn't a right Hence the classic liberal difference between rights to something and freedom to do something
  - AnthonyMouse 8y ago
    By this definition all of the usual "rights" are really freedoms. Which leaves me waiting for an explanation of why accessing data a third party has on you should be elevated above the freedom of speech, travel, association and so on as something private parties should be required to do for all comers without compensation.
phreeza 8y ago
One (admittedly theoretical) way to get companies to reveal the cost is to tax them based on the self-declared value of the data. The lower value they declare, the less taxes they pay, but the cheaper they have to give it away. One could do this for either personal requests, or even more radical, force the companies to sell the data, at the delcared price, to competitors. I think this is pretty much suggested by Eric Posner in his book Radical Markets.

by d4l3k 8y ago

AnthonyMouse 8y ago

> "cost of producing the data" seems really hard to strictly define. What's stopping a company from implementing extremely tedious procedures and billing $100 an hour to discourage people from requesting it? Government agencies have been known to do this when they don't want to release FIOA information. Then they get sued over it by the ACLU or similar. > In addition, GPDR says that getting access to data on you is a right and it seems contradictory to have to pay for something that is your right to have. That is how all the other rights work. Freedom of the press isn't a right to use someone else's printing press without compensating them.

ttoinou 8y ago
access to data on you is a right Freedom of the press isn't a right Hence the classic liberal difference between rights to something and freedom to do something
- AnthonyMouse 8y ago
  By this definition all of the usual "rights" are really freedoms. Which leaves me waiting for an explanation of why accessing data a third party has on you should be elevated above the freedom of speech, travel, association and so on as something private parties should be required to do for all comers without compensation.

phreeza 8y ago

One (admittedly theoretical) way to get companies to reveal the cost is to tax them based on the self-declared value of the data. The lower value they declare, the less taxes they pay, but the cheaper they have to give it away. One could do this for either personal requests, or even more radical, force the companies to sell the data, at the delcared price, to competitors. I think this is pretty much suggested by Eric Posner in his book Radical Markets.