7 ms·

One important thing to note is that the DPC (Irish DPA) did not want to fine WhatsApp and only did so after being forced by other DPAs through the arbitration p

One important thing to note is that the DPC (Irish DPA) did not want to fine WhatsApp and only did so after being forced by other DPAs through the arbitration process. You can consult the EDPB decision on that matter here: https://edpb.europa.eu/our-work-tools/our-documents/binding-decision-board-art-65/binding-decision-12021-dispute-arisen_fr https://edpb.europa.eu/our-work-tools/our-documents/binding-... EDIT: Max Schrems' reaction (NOYB): >"We welcome the first decision by the Irish regulator. However, the DPC gets about ten thousand complaints per year since 2018 and this is the first major fine. The DPC also proposed an initial € 50 million fine and was forced by the other European data protection authorities to move towards € 225 million, which is still only 0.08% of the turnover of the Facebook Group. The GDPR foresees fines of up to 4% of the turnover. This shows how the DPC is still extremely dysfunctional." source: https://noyb.eu/en/statement-dpc-issues-eu-225-million-fine-whatsapp https://noyb.eu/en/statement-dpc-issues-eu-225-million-fine-...

josefx 5y ago
So acting as a tax haven was not enough, they also have to undermine every other EU regulation to keep their cash cows happy? Can't we just kick them out already?
- messe 5y ago
  Only 8 of around 40 DPAs that were involved in the process disagreed with the Irish DPC's conclusion according to TFA, so I don't think it's fully fair to lay the blame solely on Ireland here.
  - cataphract 5y ago
    Only 8 formally objected. That doesn't mean the remaining ones agreed with the draft decision. They may not even have looked at it.
  - croes 5y ago
    Which 8?
    - JackMcMack 5y ago
      a. The German (Federal) SA raised an objection on 21 January 2021; b. The Hungarian SA raised an objection on 21 January 2021; c. The Dutch SA raised an objection on 21 January 2021; d. The Polish SA raised an objection on 22 January 2021; e. The French SA raised an objection on 22 January 2021; f. The Italian SA raised an objection on 22 January 2021; g. The Baden-Wurttemberg SA raised an objection on 22 January 2021; and h. The Portuguese SA raised an objection on 22 January 2021
      - croes 5y ago
        So the top 3 economic nations of the EU objected and 5 of the top 6. I guess you need money to refuse FB's offers.
- BeniBoy 5y ago
  I'd say in that case, the regulation was resilient enough to bring the case to fruition (although this is an argument that facebook will use to defend itself). Hopefully this will motivate the DPC to be a little more active in the future (nobody likes to be wrong, especially wrong in public). Some DPA are unwilling to act, the best thing to make them is to file complaint or support organisations that do (see the comment on NOYB). They are bound by laws to act, let's make them !
- Chris2048 5y ago
  Because, as brexit proves, the EU was designed so you couldn't easily leave.
  - Hamuko 5y ago
    It wasn't the leaving part that was difficult. It was the UK making up its mind on how it wanted to leave that was the difficult part.
    - earnubs 5y ago
      The UK wanted to leave as an intact entity, the EU made that difficult, therefore compromises.
      - messe 5y ago
        The UK would have had to breach or at least seriously jeopardize the GFA to do so. An agreement they willingly signed up to. The UK brought that upon themselves.
        earnubs 5y ago
        This is, probably unwittingly, making my point. Brexit in no way breaches the GFA. Threatening a return to violence in Ireland over Brexit is what I mean by "making things difficult". The Troubles were not about sausage shipments between Belfast and Dublin. :)
        CaptainZapp 5y ago
        England just have to live up to their obligations and accept a sea border between England and Northern Ireland. In fact, they signed up for exactly that not even 2 years ago. It seems, though, that they were just kicking the can down the road and never really had intentions to live up to their side of the deal. Global Britain! Yeah, right...
        messe 5y ago
- anonymousDan 5y ago
  Dick comment. I know this will get downvoted but the parent doesn't deserve much better.
- Y_Y 5y ago
  I think you'd have a hard time demonstrating that Ireland actually is a tax haven. I've heard that accusation from several sources, but never anything convincing. As for undermining regulations, the EU has procedures for ensuring member states enact compliant legislation, and after that the country has its own legal system, not more corrupt than average. It might be that they're applying the law as they understand it and that the judiciary has some independence from commercial interests. You're welcome to make the case otherwise, but making accusations as you've done isn't what I'd consider constructive dialogue.
  - gostsamo 5y ago
    The EU insisted on Apple paying billions to the irish government that the irish government fought not to get. Irish-Dutch sandwich is a term designating the practice of using a tax loophole that lets big corporations avoid paying taxes. Honestly, I'm not sure that the time to prove Ireland tax heaven will be that tough. Of course, the EU does not designate Ireland as a tax heaven, but you should have to keep in mind that Ireland is a member state of the EU and the tax heaven list is approved with unanimous vote which might be a cause for a conflict of interests.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - roomey 5y ago
      In all fairness: The Dutch sandwich has been illigal for years now The fine related to 'state aid' in the form of advice to Apple, and was appealed as the Exchequer makes far more money from Apple and other big tech then this fine would ever cover. Have a look at the effective tax rates between Ireland and France if you want an eye opener
      - WastingMyTime89 5y ago
        According to the OECD [1],France has an effective average corporate tax rate of 29.4% while Ireland has a 12.4% one. France has one of the highest in the OECD and Ireland one of the lowest. Unless you are arguing that Ireland is indeed effectively a tax haven, I don't see the eye opener. [1] https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=CTS_ETR https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=CTS_ETR
- OliverM 5y ago
  Sure. We're undermining every EU regulation. 100%. It's like a national Irish pastime! And the EU is a clique that can shun members at will, and Germany is a moral exemplar to us all. Do you really think like this?
  - Certhas 5y ago
    Everyone benefits from the EU in different ways. But that Ireland is a tax haven is not exactly a shocking accusation. Ireland is actively lobbying against global minimum taxation rules, e.g.: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/08/business/ireland-minimum-corporate-tax.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/08/business/ireland-minimum-...
    - OliverM 5y ago
      I'm not "shocked" by that accusation. I don't dispute the tax haven allegation, though we're likely to agree to the tax changes. Here's a recent story from the meeting between the Irish and French leaders. The differing view on taxation is clearly there (though it's more that we're worried about a mandated EU premium on top of it, not that we're against a global minimum). But on every other key issue the French openly say we're working closely together. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/differences-over-corporate-tax-rate-at-martin-macron-meeting-in-dublin-1.4657283 https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/differences-over-co... That's a fair distance from 'undermining every EU regulation'.
josefx 5y ago
Facebook is doing some great anonymization: > The objection raises that not all computationally possible numbers are indeed assigned. Therefore, the lossy hash refers not to at least 16 numbers but to a maximum of 16 numbers. Furthermore, if additional data is stored along with the lossy hash, the number of individuals represented by the associated phone numbers can be reduced as data subjects not matching this additional data can be excluded. If e.g., so the DE SA, the gender is also stored, it is possible to at least divide these 16 in half. So their hashcodes can be mapped to 16 different users, which can be trivially reduced to a single person if you have any additional information about them.
- wnkrshm 5y ago
  After they said it was technologically infeasible to combine WhatsApp with their service before the takeover (which was a condition for the takeover if one remembers), I don't trust anything they say anymore. They stated to the merger review committee that the WhatsApp takeover couldn't feasably lead to data sharing with Facebook. And got fined 110m EUR for that, a pittance. You couldn't take out an insurance policy against a successful merger for that money. From [0]: "When Facebook notified the acquisition of WhatsApp in 2014, it informed the Commission that it would be unable to establish reliable automated matching between Facebook users' accounts and WhatsApp users' accounts. It stated this both in the notification form and in a reply to a request of information from the Commission." Edit: typo [0] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_17_1369 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_17_...

josefx 5y ago

So acting as a tax haven was not enough, they also have to undermine every other EU regulation to keep their cash cows happy? Can't we just kick them out already?

messe 5y ago
Only 8 of around 40 DPAs that were involved in the process disagreed with the Irish DPC's conclusion according to TFA, so I don't think it's fully fair to lay the blame solely on Ireland here.
- cataphract 5y ago
  Only 8 formally objected. That doesn't mean the remaining ones agreed with the draft decision. They may not even have looked at it.
- croes 5y ago
  Which 8?
  - JackMcMack 5y ago
    a. The German (Federal) SA raised an objection on 21 January 2021; b. The Hungarian SA raised an objection on 21 January 2021; c. The Dutch SA raised an objection on 21 January 2021; d. The Polish SA raised an objection on 22 January 2021; e. The French SA raised an objection on 22 January 2021; f. The Italian SA raised an objection on 22 January 2021; g. The Baden-Wurttemberg SA raised an objection on 22 January 2021; and h. The Portuguese SA raised an objection on 22 January 2021
    - croes 5y ago
      So the top 3 economic nations of the EU objected and 5 of the top 6. I guess you need money to refuse FB's offers.
BeniBoy 5y ago
I'd say in that case, the regulation was resilient enough to bring the case to fruition (although this is an argument that facebook will use to defend itself). Hopefully this will motivate the DPC to be a little more active in the future (nobody likes to be wrong, especially wrong in public). Some DPA are unwilling to act, the best thing to make them is to file complaint or support organisations that do (see the comment on NOYB). They are bound by laws to act, let's make them !
Chris2048 5y ago
Because, as brexit proves, the EU was designed so you couldn't easily leave.
- Hamuko 5y ago
  It wasn't the leaving part that was difficult. It was the UK making up its mind on how it wanted to leave that was the difficult part.
  - earnubs 5y ago
    The UK wanted to leave as an intact entity, the EU made that difficult, therefore compromises.
    - messe 5y ago
      The UK would have had to breach or at least seriously jeopardize the GFA to do so. An agreement they willingly signed up to. The UK brought that upon themselves.
      - earnubs 5y ago
        This is, probably unwittingly, making my point. Brexit in no way breaches the GFA. Threatening a return to violence in Ireland over Brexit is what I mean by "making things difficult". The Troubles were not about sausage shipments between Belfast and Dublin. :)
        CaptainZapp 5y ago
        England just have to live up to their obligations and accept a sea border between England and Northern Ireland. In fact, they signed up for exactly that not even 2 years ago. It seems, though, that they were just kicking the can down the road and never really had intentions to live up to their side of the deal. Global Britain! Yeah, right...
        messe 5y ago
anonymousDan 5y ago
Dick comment. I know this will get downvoted but the parent doesn't deserve much better.
Y_Y 5y ago
I think you'd have a hard time demonstrating that Ireland actually is a tax haven. I've heard that accusation from several sources, but never anything convincing. As for undermining regulations, the EU has procedures for ensuring member states enact compliant legislation, and after that the country has its own legal system, not more corrupt than average. It might be that they're applying the law as they understand it and that the judiciary has some independence from commercial interests. You're welcome to make the case otherwise, but making accusations as you've done isn't what I'd consider constructive dialogue.
- gostsamo 5y ago
  The EU insisted on Apple paying billions to the irish government that the irish government fought not to get. Irish-Dutch sandwich is a term designating the practice of using a tax loophole that lets big corporations avoid paying taxes. Honestly, I'm not sure that the time to prove Ireland tax heaven will be that tough. Of course, the EU does not designate Ireland as a tax heaven, but you should have to keep in mind that Ireland is a member state of the EU and the tax heaven list is approved with unanimous vote which might be a cause for a conflict of interests.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - roomey 5y ago
    In all fairness: The Dutch sandwich has been illigal for years now The fine related to 'state aid' in the form of advice to Apple, and was appealed as the Exchequer makes far more money from Apple and other big tech then this fine would ever cover. Have a look at the effective tax rates between Ireland and France if you want an eye opener
    - WastingMyTime89 5y ago
      According to the OECD [1],France has an effective average corporate tax rate of 29.4% while Ireland has a 12.4% one. France has one of the highest in the OECD and Ireland one of the lowest. Unless you are arguing that Ireland is indeed effectively a tax haven, I don't see the eye opener. [1] https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=CTS_ETR https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=CTS_ETR
OliverM 5y ago
Sure. We're undermining every EU regulation. 100%. It's like a national Irish pastime! And the EU is a clique that can shun members at will, and Germany is a moral exemplar to us all. Do you really think like this?
- Certhas 5y ago
  Everyone benefits from the EU in different ways. But that Ireland is a tax haven is not exactly a shocking accusation. Ireland is actively lobbying against global minimum taxation rules, e.g.: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/08/business/ireland-minimum-corporate-tax.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/08/business/ireland-minimum-...
  - OliverM 5y ago
    I'm not "shocked" by that accusation. I don't dispute the tax haven allegation, though we're likely to agree to the tax changes. Here's a recent story from the meeting between the Irish and French leaders. The differing view on taxation is clearly there (though it's more that we're worried about a mandated EU premium on top of it, not that we're against a global minimum). But on every other key issue the French openly say we're working closely together. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/differences-over-corporate-tax-rate-at-martin-macron-meeting-in-dublin-1.4657283 https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/differences-over-co... That's a fair distance from 'undermining every EU regulation'.

josefx 5y ago

Facebook is doing some great anonymization: > The objection raises that not all computationally possible numbers are indeed assigned. Therefore, the lossy hash refers not to at least 16 numbers but to a maximum of 16 numbers. Furthermore, if additional data is stored along with the lossy hash, the number of individuals represented by the associated phone numbers can be reduced as data subjects not matching this additional data can be excluded. If e.g., so the DE SA, the gender is also stored, it is possible to at least divide these 16 in half. So their hashcodes can be mapped to 16 different users, which can be trivially reduced to a single person if you have any additional information about them.

wnkrshm 5y ago
After they said it was technologically infeasible to combine WhatsApp with their service before the takeover (which was a condition for the takeover if one remembers), I don't trust anything they say anymore. They stated to the merger review committee that the WhatsApp takeover couldn't feasably lead to data sharing with Facebook. And got fined 110m EUR for that, a pittance. You couldn't take out an insurance policy against a successful merger for that money. From [0]: "When Facebook notified the acquisition of WhatsApp in 2014, it informed the Commission that it would be unable to establish reliable automated matching between Facebook users' accounts and WhatsApp users' accounts. It stated this both in the notification form and in a reply to a request of information from the Commission." Edit: typo [0] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_17_1369 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_17_...