4 ms·

IMO the only way GDPR would have worked the way its advocates hoped is if the enacting statutes created a private right of action. (I don't even know if private

IMO the only way GDPR would have worked the way its advocates hoped is if the enacting statutes created a private right of action. (I don't even know if private rights of action is a thing in the EU.) In the US some (though not enough) consumer protection or civil right laws expressly grant plaintiffs the right to bring their own lawsuit in court. There are edge conditions depending on the laws or jurisdictions involved. For example, some laws provide a private right of action only if the state agents decline to pursue the case. While other laws may require the plaintiff to give notice to some agencies first. Otherwise, laws that may look bold on paper become toothless based on inaction by the state agents that must enforce them. In contrast, if a law includes a private right of action and reasonable fee shifting provisions, private attorneys will pick up the slack and then some. For example, in the US, the medical privacy regime, HIPAA, is considerably weakened by its absence (as far as I know) of a private right of action. For example, if your medical privacy is violated by your HR department or your doctor, you cannot sue under US Federal HIPAA laws, you need to sue under some other law and prove real damages. Note, there may be other laws that cover the same facts, such as, state privacy laws, or the like. And, in some circumstance, proven HIPAA violations may be used as evidence of negligence, or the like, to meet the requirements of the other laws.

e73u3hdjfu 6y ago
I'm uncertain why the assumption is that GDPR was actually meant to appease advocates. It's pretty obvious that the law as it exists impacts foreign companies far more than EU companies. If the point of these laws was strictly for the benefit of European consumers then there'd be more dialogue around the value to consumers of having cheaper digital goods and services vs. the often abstract and vague benefits of GDPR's regulations. From this perspective, the ethical concerns seem mostly like a smokescreen to justify protectionist measures that will defend less efficient EU businesses in a manner similar to their current agricultural laws which exist mainly to protect the EU's wildly inefficient meat and dairy industries.
M2Ys4U 6y ago
>IMO the only way GDPR would have worked the way its advocates hoped is if the enacting statutes created a private right of action. Article 79 Right to an effective judicial remedy against a controller or processor 1. Without prejudice to any available administrative or non-judicial remedy, including the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority pursuant to Article 77, each data subject shall have the right to an effective judicial remedy where he or she considers that his or her rights under this Regulation have been infringed as a result of the processing of his or her personal data in non-compliance with this Regulation. 2. Proceedings against a controller or a processor shall be brought before the courts of the Member State where the controller or processor has an establishment. Alternatively, such proceedings may be brought before the courts of the Member State where the data subject has his or her habitual residence, unless the controller or processor is a public authority of a Member State acting in the exercise of its public powers.

e73u3hdjfu 6y ago

I'm uncertain why the assumption is that GDPR was actually meant to appease advocates. It's pretty obvious that the law as it exists impacts foreign companies far more than EU companies. If the point of these laws was strictly for the benefit of European consumers then there'd be more dialogue around the value to consumers of having cheaper digital goods and services vs. the often abstract and vague benefits of GDPR's regulations. From this perspective, the ethical concerns seem mostly like a smokescreen to justify protectionist measures that will defend less efficient EU businesses in a manner similar to their current agricultural laws which exist mainly to protect the EU's wildly inefficient meat and dairy industries.

M2Ys4U 6y ago

>IMO the only way GDPR would have worked the way its advocates hoped is if the enacting statutes created a private right of action. Article 79 Right to an effective judicial remedy against a controller or processor 1. Without prejudice to any available administrative or non-judicial remedy, including the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority pursuant to Article 77, each data subject shall have the right to an effective judicial remedy where he or she considers that his or her rights under this Regulation have been infringed as a result of the processing of his or her personal data in non-compliance with this Regulation. 2. Proceedings against a controller or a processor shall be brought before the courts of the Member State where the controller or processor has an establishment. Alternatively, such proceedings may be brought before the courts of the Member State where the data subject has his or her habitual residence, unless the controller or processor is a public authority of a Member State acting in the exercise of its public powers.