4 ms·
>Secondly, monetizing the EU is a step that usually occurs very late into the life of a startup. Startups almost always monetize the US first. It's not a matte
by HeadsUpHigh 8y ago
>Secondly, monetizing the EU is a step that usually occurs very late into the life of a startup. Startups almost always monetize the US first.
It's not a matter of what the founder/CEO of a startup chooses here. I will often open links from e.g. New York Times or other US news sites because something happened in New York or there's an interesting opinion piece that I want to read. These sites are profiting from my clicks so they have to obey the EU laws. If it was impossible for them to determine that I'm an EU citizen then it's a different story but an geo ban is trivial.
- friedman23 8y ago> It's not a matter of what the founder/CEO of a startup chooses here. I will often open links from e.g. New York Times or other US news sites because something happened in New York or there's an interesting opinion piece that I want to read. These sites are profiting from my clicks so they have to obey the EU laws Ok, I don't think you understand how ads work. Your clicks don't make a website money if they are not selling ads in your country. The New York Times is not a startup so your point is irrelevant. edit: if you are not aware that different countries have different ads markets your probably shouldn't have an opinion on GDPR.
- repolfx 8y agoOr - they could just make money off you, and ignore what the EU wants! Ultimately the EU's only recourse in things like this is to either convince the USA to act as its enforcer, or to set up a Great Firewall to stop you browsing to the NYT.
- zaarn 8y agoOr the EU could declare that business with NYT means you can't do business in the EU. Which would probably hurt a bit if ad networks jump off (I doubt Google wants to deal with this). There are more than two options there, many more.