3 ms·
A few notes: > One email and 24 hours later, all the data they had about me was deleted. You make it sound as if this is new, but this was also possible under
by lucb1e 7y ago
A few notes:
> One email and 24 hours later, all the data they had about me was deleted.
You make it sound as if this is new, but this was also possible under the DPD from the late 90s. GDPR didn't improve that. (What helped is that GDPR isn't from the late 90s but was introduced in a year where privacy was already a hot topic, so it was picked up by the media and now companies actually know about it so you don't have to point out the law before they understand what you're talking about when you do an access/deletion request. But it technically hasn't changed.)
> this only works if you're in europe buying from an european store
Sort of. While the EU claims it applies to anyone, the Chinese government isn't going to give a rat's ass if you sue and win a court case against a Chinese company. However, if that Chinese company has assets in the EU, they can be seized, not to mention that they can probably be banned from the EU market altogether.
Anyone who wishes to continue selling to Europeans and not have any European assets seized would do well to comply with European law, also if their headquarters / choice of court / assets is/are outside the EU.
- m11a 7y ago> You make it sound as if this is new, but this was also possible under the DPD from the late 90s. GDPR didn't improve that. GDPR did improve it. Under the implementation by member states of the DPD many required that you can show "duress and/or distress" from continued processing to request erasure. GDPR made it so you don't have to show anything, you can just request it (or, more technically, you can withdraw consent). And the DPD only said: > as appropriate the rectification, erasure or blocking of data the processing of which does not comply with the provisions of this Directive, in particular because of the incomplete or inaccurate nature of the data; Organisations often took a very conservative interpretation of this which wasn't enforced differently by many DPAs in EU states. GDPR Art. 17 is definitely stronger.