3 ms·

>So basically every corporation operating in the US has to follow US law at all times, regardless of the economic/legal circumstances in other countries? wait

>So basically every corporation operating in the US has to follow US law at all times, regardless of the economic/legal circumstances in other countries? wait - was the argument that the laws of these other countries they were operating in required them to fund paramilitary death squads? I must have missed that part. I'm thinking the slope is not as slippery as feared here. on edit: Ok I read your Mexican cartel example, slipperiness still not apparent to me how one slides from we hired death squads that killed people to we hired a cartel for protection but the money we paid was put in a big pile of money that cartel used to also fund bad stuff the cartel did that hurt people who were not trying to damage our company. at any rate the amount of money paid out here having people killed is the usual cost of doing business slap on the wrist considering Chiquita's size and doesn't actually affect them. The negative publicity is worse.

bryanrasmussen 2y ago
continuing instead of editing: I mean actually this is probably the rule for most countries regarding some laws at least - EU companies as I understand the law need to follow GDPR when outside EU, there are laws against bribery and money laundering that work across nations despite what the economic/legal circumstances are in play in other countries. Luckily though I believe every country in the world that is not a fictional dystopia actually has laws against corporations paying to have people killed so it probably doesn't matter much in this case anyway.
- marcus_holmes 2y ago
  Non-EU companies need to follow GDPR when serving EU customers, yes. There are many websites that geoblock EU visitors because they don't want to comply with GDPR. But the EU only enforces that for transactions involving EU citizens. If you want to grab all the data from US visitors, go for it, the EU will not complain (as long as you don't do it to EU visitors). I think the difference here is that the US is enforcing US law on an operation in a foreign country by a company that operates in the US. The equivalent would be the EU enforcing GDPR for all site transactions, regardless of the visitor's nationality. The point of making this distinction is that there are countries that have laws that we don't want to follow (e.g. various Middle East countries having drastic punishments for atheism and apostasy), and that should not be applied to people (or organisations) who don't reside there. If the USA makes the precedent that it can enforce its domestic law on actions happening in other countries, then it's possible that (e.g.) Australia could enforce its ridiculous anti-online-bullying laws on US citizens who have never left the USA.
  - bryanrasmussen 2y ago
    >But the EU only enforces that for transactions involving EU citizens. If you want to grab all the data from US visitors, go for it, the EU will not complain (as long as you don't do it to EU visitors). https://europa.eu/youreurope/business/dealing-with-customers/data-protection/data-protection-gdpr/index_en.htm https://europa.eu/youreurope/business/dealing-with-customers... >The GDPR applies if: >your company processes personal data and is based in the EU, regardless of where the actual data processing takes place >your company is established outside the EU but processes personal data in relation to the offering of goods or services to individuals in the EU, or monitors the behaviour of individuals within the EU Notice how they emphasized EU citizens? Yeah, neither did I.
    - atwrk 2y ago
      The don't emphasize citizenship because it is enough to live in the EU for the law to apply, i.e. immigrants etc. are included. If you look into the actual GDPR, you will find the phrase "data subjects who are in the Union", which are "natural persons", for whom the data protection laws apply.
      - bryanrasmussen 2y ago
        >If you look into the actual GDPR, oh good! Cause I've done that. >you will find the phrase "data subjects who are in the Union", which are "natural persons", for whom the data protection laws apply. tourists who are in the union also apply, there is no idea that you can figure out if that person is just traveling through the EU for some months you can do what you want with them. https://www.dataprotectionreport.com/2018/12/edpb-clarifies-territorial-scope-of-the-gdpr/ https://www.dataprotectionreport.com/2018/12/edpb-clarifies-... >Data subjects in the Union means any person in the Union whose information is being collected at that moment, regardless of their nationality or legal status. That means EU citizens and residents are squarely in scope. And someone in the EU, even a US tourist using an app in the EU, is a data subject in the Union for purposes of the GDPR. on edit: if you were just clarifying/backing up my original point, sorry, I thought it seemed you were going with interpretation of the person who I was replying to an EU company can do what they want with any U.S citizen's data.

bryanrasmussen 2y ago

continuing instead of editing: I mean actually this is probably the rule for most countries regarding some laws at least - EU companies as I understand the law need to follow GDPR when outside EU, there are laws against bribery and money laundering that work across nations despite what the economic/legal circumstances are in play in other countries. Luckily though I believe every country in the world that is not a fictional dystopia actually has laws against corporations paying to have people killed so it probably doesn't matter much in this case anyway.

marcus_holmes 2y ago
Non-EU companies need to follow GDPR when serving EU customers, yes. There are many websites that geoblock EU visitors because they don't want to comply with GDPR. But the EU only enforces that for transactions involving EU citizens. If you want to grab all the data from US visitors, go for it, the EU will not complain (as long as you don't do it to EU visitors). I think the difference here is that the US is enforcing US law on an operation in a foreign country by a company that operates in the US. The equivalent would be the EU enforcing GDPR for all site transactions, regardless of the visitor's nationality. The point of making this distinction is that there are countries that have laws that we don't want to follow (e.g. various Middle East countries having drastic punishments for atheism and apostasy), and that should not be applied to people (or organisations) who don't reside there. If the USA makes the precedent that it can enforce its domestic law on actions happening in other countries, then it's possible that (e.g.) Australia could enforce its ridiculous anti-online-bullying laws on US citizens who have never left the USA.
- bryanrasmussen 2y ago
  >But the EU only enforces that for transactions involving EU citizens. If you want to grab all the data from US visitors, go for it, the EU will not complain (as long as you don't do it to EU visitors). https://europa.eu/youreurope/business/dealing-with-customers/data-protection/data-protection-gdpr/index_en.htm https://europa.eu/youreurope/business/dealing-with-customers... >The GDPR applies if: >your company processes personal data and is based in the EU, regardless of where the actual data processing takes place >your company is established outside the EU but processes personal data in relation to the offering of goods or services to individuals in the EU, or monitors the behaviour of individuals within the EU Notice how they emphasized EU citizens? Yeah, neither did I.
  - atwrk 2y ago
    The don't emphasize citizenship because it is enough to live in the EU for the law to apply, i.e. immigrants etc. are included. If you look into the actual GDPR, you will find the phrase "data subjects who are in the Union", which are "natural persons", for whom the data protection laws apply.
    - bryanrasmussen 2y ago
      >If you look into the actual GDPR, oh good! Cause I've done that. >you will find the phrase "data subjects who are in the Union", which are "natural persons", for whom the data protection laws apply. tourists who are in the union also apply, there is no idea that you can figure out if that person is just traveling through the EU for some months you can do what you want with them. https://www.dataprotectionreport.com/2018/12/edpb-clarifies-territorial-scope-of-the-gdpr/ https://www.dataprotectionreport.com/2018/12/edpb-clarifies-... >Data subjects in the Union means any person in the Union whose information is being collected at that moment, regardless of their nationality or legal status. That means EU citizens and residents are squarely in scope. And someone in the EU, even a US tourist using an app in the EU, is a data subject in the Union for purposes of the GDPR. on edit: if you were just clarifying/backing up my original point, sorry, I thought it seemed you were going with interpretation of the person who I was replying to an EU company can do what they want with any U.S citizen's data.