3 ms·

Because that would be a loophole to sidestep EU laws? If you offer your services in the EU, you have to respect EU law.

JoshTriplett 8y ago
If you offer your services on the Internet, and someone chooses to use them from the EU, that does not mean you "offer your services in the EU". Or do you plan to make all of your web services "respect" the laws of 200+ countries in the world, and for that matter all the sub-jurisdictions of those countries (such as states or provinces or cities) that have their own laws? The EU is not special in that regard, they're just one more jurisdiction that the service isn't hosted in.
- BlackFly 8y ago
  It is context based. In the case at hand, I think it is fairly clear that the Eve corp wants users from Europe, since otherwise other corps which take users from Europe would out compete them. I'm not an Eve player, but my understanding is that you want your corp to be as large as possible to produce certain ships/stations? Other contexts, like a company offering investments to US based startups is unlikely to be seen as offering services to European residents even if Europeans can create accounts there. As to jurisdiction, you can always sit in your home country and ignore any rulings against you from other countries so long as you are sure that your own country will not extradite you for such a thing (I am confident that Canada would not extradite a Canadian residence for such a thing). Just don't ever try to cross the border into a European country.
  - isostatic 8y ago
    America set the precedent with arresting foreign nationals for breaching US laws while on foreign territory with Dmitry Sklyarov
    - dragonwriter 8y ago
      > America set the precedent with arresting foreign nationals for breaching US laws while on foreign territory with Dmitry Sklyarov It set the precedent for arresting foreign national for breaching US laws while on foreign territory considerably before Sklyarov's arrest in 2001; some notable prior examples include Humberto Alvarez Machain (1985) and Manuel Noriega (1989), though they weren't the earliest, either. Insofar as Sklyarov's case was notable, it was more because the charged offenses were completely legal where they occurred, not because they were allegedly committed by a foreign national outside of the US.
      - isostatic 8y ago
        In which case Americans who haven't broken American law by ignoring GDPR requests from their EU clients should not be surprised if they are arrested if they ever go to Europe.
        dragonwriter 8y ago
        AFAIK, GDPR is a regulation with civil financial penalties, and not a criminal law, so, yes, anyone should be surprised if they are arrested for violating it.
        isostatic 8y ago
        If you don't pay those penalties though then you'd be in trouble
yoz-y 8y ago
If you run a website, is "not blocking users from the EU" considered as providing services in the EU? I am genuinely curious because in that case GDPR seems to impact many companies disregarding whether they actually do any business here.
- icebraining 8y ago
  See my sibling comment. Merely being accessible is in fact not enough to be considered as providing services in the EU.
- belorn 8y ago
  There is no simple answer without more context, but if they are not doing any business from those users then the answer is likely no. There are several exceptions for normal operation of running a public website on the Internet.
- johannes1234321 8y ago
  If you offer a Czech or Polish translation, probably: yes If you offer a French or Spanish translation: maybe If you run ads in Germany: certainly If you advertise accepting Euro: most likely If you embedded ads from an ad network which sends localised ads to Europeans: most likely When having a site reporting news on local events in an African municipality most likely not. There is no clear line, as writing that down is impossible and always requires judgement. Also the question is whether EU can enforce it. If you have no European subsidiary and live abroad there is little they can do.
jfoutz 8y ago
Are they? I don’t mean to be fussy, well maybe a little, but when you ask for something from Atlantis, and Atlantis responds, is that interaction at your place? Is it in Atlantis? Some weird combination of the two? I don’t outright disagree, I don’t think it’s settled or even established yet. Mail is probably going to be a big precedent. Everything from play by mail chess to ordering from Sears will have to be considered.
icebraining 8y ago
Unfortunately, it's not that clear. Per Recital 23, the service must intend to have EU users, and merely being accessible in the EU is not enough to ascertain that. It must have some signs, such as accepting European currency or mentioning advantages to European users. Thankfully most sites clearly want to accept money from all currencies, but if this corp didn't charge, it might be difficult to show that they envisaged having EU users.
t0astbread 8y ago
Since this is still a bit relevant, here's a new radical idea: Every service provider should respect its users' desires for and rights to privacy and just handle erasure requests (as far as possible) regardless of legal requirements. And if it can't handle that, it's a toxic business and shouldn't exist.

If you offer your services on the Internet, and someone chooses to use them from the EU, that does not mean you "offer your services in the EU". Or do you plan to make all of your web services "respect" the laws of 200+ countries in the world, and for that matter all the sub-jurisdictions of those countries (such as states or provinces or cities) that have their own laws? The EU is not special in that regard, they're just one more jurisdiction that the service isn't hosted in.

BlackFly 8y ago
It is context based. In the case at hand, I think it is fairly clear that the Eve corp wants users from Europe, since otherwise other corps which take users from Europe would out compete them. I'm not an Eve player, but my understanding is that you want your corp to be as large as possible to produce certain ships/stations? Other contexts, like a company offering investments to US based startups is unlikely to be seen as offering services to European residents even if Europeans can create accounts there. As to jurisdiction, you can always sit in your home country and ignore any rulings against you from other countries so long as you are sure that your own country will not extradite you for such a thing (I am confident that Canada would not extradite a Canadian residence for such a thing). Just don't ever try to cross the border into a European country.
- isostatic 8y ago
  America set the precedent with arresting foreign nationals for breaching US laws while on foreign territory with Dmitry Sklyarov
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > America set the precedent with arresting foreign nationals for breaching US laws while on foreign territory with Dmitry Sklyarov It set the precedent for arresting foreign national for breaching US laws while on foreign territory considerably before Sklyarov's arrest in 2001; some notable prior examples include Humberto Alvarez Machain (1985) and Manuel Noriega (1989), though they weren't the earliest, either. Insofar as Sklyarov's case was notable, it was more because the charged offenses were completely legal where they occurred, not because they were allegedly committed by a foreign national outside of the US.
    - isostatic 8y ago
      In which case Americans who haven't broken American law by ignoring GDPR requests from their EU clients should not be surprised if they are arrested if they ever go to Europe.
      - dragonwriter 8y ago
        AFAIK, GDPR is a regulation with civil financial penalties, and not a criminal law, so, yes, anyone should be surprised if they are arrested for violating it.
        isostatic 8y ago
        If you don't pay those penalties though then you'd be in trouble

yoz-y 8y ago

If you run a website, is "not blocking users from the EU" considered as providing services in the EU? I am genuinely curious because in that case GDPR seems to impact many companies disregarding whether they actually do any business here.

icebraining 8y ago
See my sibling comment. Merely being accessible is in fact not enough to be considered as providing services in the EU.
belorn 8y ago
There is no simple answer without more context, but if they are not doing any business from those users then the answer is likely no. There are several exceptions for normal operation of running a public website on the Internet.
johannes1234321 8y ago
If you offer a Czech or Polish translation, probably: yes If you offer a French or Spanish translation: maybe If you run ads in Germany: certainly If you advertise accepting Euro: most likely If you embedded ads from an ad network which sends localised ads to Europeans: most likely When having a site reporting news on local events in an African municipality most likely not. There is no clear line, as writing that down is impossible and always requires judgement. Also the question is whether EU can enforce it. If you have no European subsidiary and live abroad there is little they can do.

jfoutz 8y ago

Are they? I don’t mean to be fussy, well maybe a little, but when you ask for something from Atlantis, and Atlantis responds, is that interaction at your place? Is it in Atlantis? Some weird combination of the two? I don’t outright disagree, I don’t think it’s settled or even established yet. Mail is probably going to be a big precedent. Everything from play by mail chess to ordering from Sears will have to be considered.

icebraining 8y ago

Unfortunately, it's not that clear. Per Recital 23, the service must intend to have EU users, and merely being accessible in the EU is not enough to ascertain that. It must have some signs, such as accepting European currency or mentioning advantages to European users. Thankfully most sites clearly want to accept money from all currencies, but if this corp didn't charge, it might be difficult to show that they envisaged having EU users.

t0astbread 8y ago

Since this is still a bit relevant, here's a new radical idea: Every service provider should respect its users' desires for and rights to privacy and just handle erasure requests (as far as possible) regardless of legal requirements. And if it can't handle that, it's a toxic business and shouldn't exist.