3 ms·

Actually, I'm going to stand corrected.. While I stand behind the jurisdictional argument I've made per the Territorial Scope of GDPR (https://gdpr-info.eu/art-

Actually, I'm going to stand corrected.. While I stand behind the jurisdictional argument I've made per the Territorial Scope of GDPR (https://gdpr-info.eu/art-3-gdpr/ https://gdpr-info.eu/art-3-gdpr/) -- however, in this specific case, Forbes does, in fact have an EU operation -- many in fact, (https://www.forbes.cz https://www.forbes.cz) as an example. However, the question might now be -- do visitors to the Czech site have to agree to the same conditions and tracking as do visitors to the US site. If they're doing the same shenanigans on their Czech site as they are in the US, then of course, they are potentially violating GDPR. However, if the Czech site (as an EU example) IS following GDPR but the US site isn't, then there could be a strong case made that they aren't violating GDPR since the main Forbes site would clearly not be intended for EU consumption; GDPR, while applicable to the EU-side of the Forbes business, doesn't provide a blanket requirement for GDPR compliance across Forbes's non-EU properties. As far as EU citizens vs. residents, that concept ought to be clear: an EU citizen doesn't have protection of EU laws when outside of the EU just as an American banking in France isn't protected by US banking laws. The passport of a complainant isn't relevant, but their physical location. An EU resident American who is visiting the US isn't protected by EU consumer protection laws for example, during a visit to the United States.

icebraining 8y ago
As far as EU citizens vs. residents, that concept ought to be clear: an EU citizen doesn't have protection of EU laws when outside of the EU just as an American banking in France isn't protected by US banking laws. The passport of a complainant isn't relevant, but their physical location. Yes, that's a common point of confusion, but it's completely correct: the GDPR applies to people in the Union, not to EU citizens everywhere (for non-EU companies, that is - an EU company has to apply the same protections for every user in the world).

icebraining 8y ago

As far as EU citizens vs. residents, that concept ought to be clear: an EU citizen doesn't have protection of EU laws when outside of the EU just as an American banking in France isn't protected by US banking laws. The passport of a complainant isn't relevant, but their physical location. Yes, that's a common point of confusion, but it's completely correct: the GDPR applies to people in the Union, not to EU citizens everywhere (for non-EU companies, that is - an EU company has to apply the same protections for every user in the world).