2 ms·
> IMO if it's open to abuse then it wasn't properly designed Its not open to abuse. Its just that the US corporations are violating its articles. > Clearly it
by unity1001 4y ago
> IMO if it's open to abuse then it wasn't properly designed
Its not open to abuse. Its just that the US corporations are violating its articles.
> Clearly it wasn't well thought
It was well thought out. It mandates easy Accept / Reject for tracking. Just one click. Tell the users what you will track. And allow them to choose if they want to.
The route that the US corps. took is no different from how they go around and violate laws in their home turf. They think that they can do the same with civil law. But it doesn't work that way. Eventually one will get busted for not obliging with the articles of the law.
- irusensei 4y agoYou've over skimmed the part where I wrote if its unenforceable then its also a poorly conceived rule.
- unity1001 4y agoIts pretty enforceable. It is enforced for large corporations promptly, and you would be surprised, but if someone reports a small website from an individual or small corporation, they also get the law applied to them. Eu's enforcement website has a lot of local businesses and individuals who had collected people's emails without their permission (buying them from warez sites etc), sending out spam emails then got fined for violating GDPR for collecting data without the knowledge and consent of those people.