6 ms·
> Pretty much everything in the GDPR document is untested at this point, and whether government or corporation, quite a lot of cases are going to have to be arg
by bkor 8y ago
> Pretty much everything in the GDPR document is untested at this point, and whether government or corporation, quite a lot of cases are going to have to be argued before the courts.
Why would a law be needed to be argued in court? There's been various improvements related to privacy already. Various big (national) companies have been ignoring the GDPR (disallow visitors unless they agree); this practice is now being investigated. Simplified: Netherlands asked the EU to clarify if the practice is ok according to the GDPR or not. There's been no court case. There has been discussions between companies, government as well as the EU.
See https://tweakers.net/nieuws/146391/privacywaakhond-onderzoekt-of-nieuwsmedia-avg-overtreden-met-cookiemuur.html https://tweakers.net/nieuws/146391/privacywaakhond-onderzoek...
The purpose is improved privacy, not fines.
- Sir_Substance 8y ago>Why would a law be needed to be argued in court? By the grace of living in a democratic society and not a despotic dictatorship, it is in essentially every western nation the right of any legal person who is accused of breaking a law to request judgement on the matter by the courts.
- Dahoon 8y agoTalking about how to implement or write a law and going to court to fight against a fine you get for breaking that law is two different steps far removed from each other. It is in the last one the courts decide if/how the law should be upheld and where democracy lives. What you are implying would make judges politicians.