4 ms·

Avoid to sympathize for companies based on non-competitive parameters, they aren't your friends or do anything for you regardless of where they are, don't choos

Avoid to sympathize for companies based on non-competitive parameters, they aren't your friends or do anything for you regardless of where they are, don't choose them for reasons like "Oh they pay taxes where you are so it will come back", chances are, they're not even paying taxes

ivan_gammel 2y ago
Compliance with EU regulations is an important parameter for many EU CTOs, so this can be indeed a useful project.
- lnxg33k1 2y ago
  Companies from everywhere selling on EU territories already have to be compliant with EU regulations, so EU CTOs maybe need to learn something about import/export
  - matt-p 2y ago
    Yeah literally. Law and standard contracts provide for this already, this is just pure "one of us, one of us" protectionism
    - ivan_gammel 2y ago
      > Law and standard contracts provide for this already I don’t think you really understand what are you talking about. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2020/652073/EPRS_ATA(2020)652073_EN.pdf https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2020/6520... When US and EU laws are in conflict, a business can be compliant only with one of them.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - matt-p 2y ago
        Fair enough, I was coming from a UK standpoint which has a trade agreement and GDPR in law.
        ivan_gammel 2y ago
        UK is kind of special. On paper, yes, there’s GDPR. In fact the most annoying people on this planet are UK recruiters using American data mining services. To the point where I have now a mental block for UK country code on business matters. Would I trust my data to an UK business? I‘m not sure.
        matt-p 2y ago
        It's exactly the same GDPR that every country in the EU has. That recruitment practice sounds like it could be a breach, I would go ahead and submit a SAR just to put the frighteners on them to be honest.
    - lnxg33k1 2y ago
      EU companies are the worst, I am from EU, born and raised. They say "The workforce needs to be flexible and competitive with people from all over the world" but then when they have to sell they break balls with the "We're an EU company", hell to them, I am going to pick the most competitive for me regardless of where they are
  - ivan_gammel 2y ago
    Have to be compliant != compliant, and there are multiple reasons for that. 1. An American company without any EU representation is still happy to sell the product to anyone who can pay them regardless of location. They may or even will do the bare minimum to have compliance on paper, but that is often not enough for legal team/DPOs. If you are big enough customer you may push them to complete the checklist, but in the end see 2. 2. An American company with significant business in EU will do everything to be compliant, but they cannot overcome limitations of American laws and thus will never be compliant unless there will be a solution not leading to Schrems III/IV etc. A few of them are very creative and actually find such solution (see e.g. AWS CloudHSM), but most of them don’t have resources or technical possibilities to build such things.

ivan_gammel 2y ago

Compliance with EU regulations is an important parameter for many EU CTOs, so this can be indeed a useful project.

lnxg33k1 2y ago
Companies from everywhere selling on EU territories already have to be compliant with EU regulations, so EU CTOs maybe need to learn something about import/export
- matt-p 2y ago
  Yeah literally. Law and standard contracts provide for this already, this is just pure "one of us, one of us" protectionism
  - ivan_gammel 2y ago
    > Law and standard contracts provide for this already I don’t think you really understand what are you talking about. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2020/652073/EPRS_ATA(2020)652073_EN.pdf https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2020/6520... When US and EU laws are in conflict, a business can be compliant only with one of them.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - matt-p 2y ago
      Fair enough, I was coming from a UK standpoint which has a trade agreement and GDPR in law.
      - ivan_gammel 2y ago
        UK is kind of special. On paper, yes, there’s GDPR. In fact the most annoying people on this planet are UK recruiters using American data mining services. To the point where I have now a mental block for UK country code on business matters. Would I trust my data to an UK business? I‘m not sure.
        matt-p 2y ago
        It's exactly the same GDPR that every country in the EU has. That recruitment practice sounds like it could be a breach, I would go ahead and submit a SAR just to put the frighteners on them to be honest.
  - lnxg33k1 2y ago
    EU companies are the worst, I am from EU, born and raised. They say "The workforce needs to be flexible and competitive with people from all over the world" but then when they have to sell they break balls with the "We're an EU company", hell to them, I am going to pick the most competitive for me regardless of where they are
- ivan_gammel 2y ago
  Have to be compliant != compliant, and there are multiple reasons for that. 1. An American company without any EU representation is still happy to sell the product to anyone who can pay them regardless of location. They may or even will do the bare minimum to have compliance on paper, but that is often not enough for legal team/DPOs. If you are big enough customer you may push them to complete the checklist, but in the end see 2. 2. An American company with significant business in EU will do everything to be compliant, but they cannot overcome limitations of American laws and thus will never be compliant unless there will be a solution not leading to Schrems III/IV etc. A few of them are very creative and actually find such solution (see e.g. AWS CloudHSM), but most of them don’t have resources or technical possibilities to build such things.