6 ms·

This is excessively sensitive and represents an opinion-driven interpretation of the law. It seems like a lame attempt to make an "edgy" political statement.

by andykx 7y ago

nils-m-holm 7y ago
Your ad hominem aside, it is an attempt to be safe instead of sorry.
- tluyben2 7y ago
  Well, it is an attack on the gdpr with the huge text on the top (you could just remove that and still be safe instead of sorry?) while your site, in it's previous state, does not need lawyers etc as it doesn't fail the gdpr. Especially as you can simply (if you want to be extra careful) not log IPs or any user input into the logs. Then there is nothing to 'sue' if that would be your worry.
  - nils-m-holm 7y ago
    Yes, it is an attack on the GDPR and I consider it to be justified. You do not, and that is also a perfectly valid point of view. What is uncalled for, IMO, is the name calling in the posting further up the thread.
    - tluyben2 7y ago
      Name calling is uncalled for, I agree. But you seem to reside in Germany; not sure what you are worried about anyway (you would get (but will never get because your previous site already complied fine, as do most sites that are not personal data farms) multiple warnings and you can simply respond to those as a person (no lawyer needed or warranted), but yes, ofcourse, you are entitled to your opinion. Anyone is as far as i'm concerned.
      - nils-m-holm 7y ago
        In Germany in particular there exists a nasty habit of sending C&D letters to people for all kinds of minor rule violations. You can either sign these letters and pay an (often substantial) fee or get a lawyer. Or you can try to comply in advance, often to a ridiculous degree, which I do. So I may have such a strong opinion on the GDPR because I live in Germany.
        tluyben2 7y ago
        > So I may have such a strong opinion on the GDPR because I live in Germany. Those C&Ds are pretty insane: I heard about them before, what are they for? In NL we had, for a little bit, lawyers who searched out illegal photograph usage and tried those letters. But according to Dutch law, I can remove the picture (we had a large image site) and that's it. So they made $0 of us, not did the lawyers. Is it something similar?
        nils-m-holm 7y ago
        In Germany, this used to be quite a lucrative business model for lawyers, and it was insane indeed! It got a little less profitable when the government put a cap on the fees, but I am afraid it it still a thing. Dutch law sounds much more reasonable!
        tluyben2 7y ago
        My friend with a business there said that it is not too hard or expensive to get a lawyer to spend a few minutes sending a standard response and that they (almost always) back off with even the slightest resistance? Annoying but...
        nils-m-holm 7y ago
        True, but still time wasted on an avoidable issue! Well, that's how I view it.
    - andykx 7y ago
      Name calling was not my intention, I apologize.

This is excessively sensitive and represents an opinion-driven interpretation of the law. It seems like a lame attempt to make an "edgy" political statement.

by andykx 7y ago

This is excessively sensitive and represents an opinion-driven interpretation of the law. It seems like a lame attempt to make an "edgy" political statement.

nils-m-holm 7y ago

Your ad hominem aside, it is an attempt to be safe instead of sorry.

tluyben2 7y ago
Well, it is an attack on the gdpr with the huge text on the top (you could just remove that and still be safe instead of sorry?) while your site, in it's previous state, does not need lawyers etc as it doesn't fail the gdpr. Especially as you can simply (if you want to be extra careful) not log IPs or any user input into the logs. Then there is nothing to 'sue' if that would be your worry.
- nils-m-holm 7y ago
  Yes, it is an attack on the GDPR and I consider it to be justified. You do not, and that is also a perfectly valid point of view. What is uncalled for, IMO, is the name calling in the posting further up the thread.
  - tluyben2 7y ago
    Name calling is uncalled for, I agree. But you seem to reside in Germany; not sure what you are worried about anyway (you would get (but will never get because your previous site already complied fine, as do most sites that are not personal data farms) multiple warnings and you can simply respond to those as a person (no lawyer needed or warranted), but yes, ofcourse, you are entitled to your opinion. Anyone is as far as i'm concerned.
    - nils-m-holm 7y ago
      In Germany in particular there exists a nasty habit of sending C&D letters to people for all kinds of minor rule violations. You can either sign these letters and pay an (often substantial) fee or get a lawyer. Or you can try to comply in advance, often to a ridiculous degree, which I do. So I may have such a strong opinion on the GDPR because I live in Germany.
      - tluyben2 7y ago
        > So I may have such a strong opinion on the GDPR because I live in Germany. Those C&Ds are pretty insane: I heard about them before, what are they for? In NL we had, for a little bit, lawyers who searched out illegal photograph usage and tried those letters. But according to Dutch law, I can remove the picture (we had a large image site) and that's it. So they made $0 of us, not did the lawyers. Is it something similar?
        nils-m-holm 7y ago
        In Germany, this used to be quite a lucrative business model for lawyers, and it was insane indeed! It got a little less profitable when the government put a cap on the fees, but I am afraid it it still a thing. Dutch law sounds much more reasonable!
        tluyben2 7y ago
        My friend with a business there said that it is not too hard or expensive to get a lawyer to spend a few minutes sending a standard response and that they (almost always) back off with even the slightest resistance? Annoying but...
        nils-m-holm 7y ago
        True, but still time wasted on an avoidable issue! Well, that's how I view it.
  - andykx 7y ago
    Name calling was not my intention, I apologize.