4 ms·

DMA is. GDPR is. Both are applied principally against competitors using arbitrary fines invented by the EU. No compliance guidance is given, because the laws ar

by 0xy 2y ago

DMA is. GDPR is. Both are applied principally against competitors using arbitrary fines invented by the EU. No compliance guidance is given, because the laws are inherently vague.

jbverschoor 2y ago
It's not. It is not anything specific against for example the US. We have many consumer protection laws. Has nothing to do with the US.
- 0xy 2y ago
  Link me to a single example of an EU company getting fined under DMA. After all, you said it was applied equally so it should be easy :)
  - CorrectHorseBat 2y ago
    None of the gatekeepers are EU companies. You might say that's proof of it being unfair, but can you name a EU company which should be one? I can't really think of one, US companies are just so much bigger on the internet, even in the EU. Looking at the other law you mentioned, GDPR, there are many EU companies receiving GDPR fines.
    - 0xy 2y ago
      Absolute nonsense, of course. Your case disintegrates completely given Spotify was given a specific and targeted carve-out in DMA. The law is written to arbitrarily tax US "gatekeepers" while explicitly excluding EU gatekeepers. Booking.com is another, also carved out.
  - Ragnarork 2y ago
    If a city enforces a new speed limit somewhere and only people living outside of the city break that speed limit, you argue that the law isn't applied equally because no resident of the city has been fined so far? That's the most backward way of trying to prove a point (without even addressing whether DMA and GDPR are a good thing or not, just based on that...)
yard2010 2y ago
That's not just some bs - the other side of the coin is crooked billionaires and other reptilians taking advantage of anything in their way blinded by their massive greed and psycopathic traits. Excuse me, this is not how a society should roll. Not a sustainable one at least.
patapong 2y ago
In that case, VW being fined 17bn for dieselgate should also count as a trade barrier?

by 0xy 2y ago

DMA is. GDPR is. Both are applied principally against competitors using arbitrary fines invented by the EU. No compliance guidance is given, because the laws are inherently vague.

jbverschoor 2y ago

It's not. It is not anything specific against for example the US. We have many consumer protection laws. Has nothing to do with the US.

0xy 2y ago
Link me to a single example of an EU company getting fined under DMA. After all, you said it was applied equally so it should be easy :)
- CorrectHorseBat 2y ago
  None of the gatekeepers are EU companies. You might say that's proof of it being unfair, but can you name a EU company which should be one? I can't really think of one, US companies are just so much bigger on the internet, even in the EU. Looking at the other law you mentioned, GDPR, there are many EU companies receiving GDPR fines.
  - 0xy 2y ago
    Absolute nonsense, of course. Your case disintegrates completely given Spotify was given a specific and targeted carve-out in DMA. The law is written to arbitrarily tax US "gatekeepers" while explicitly excluding EU gatekeepers. Booking.com is another, also carved out.
- Ragnarork 2y ago
  If a city enforces a new speed limit somewhere and only people living outside of the city break that speed limit, you argue that the law isn't applied equally because no resident of the city has been fined so far? That's the most backward way of trying to prove a point (without even addressing whether DMA and GDPR are a good thing or not, just based on that...)

yard2010 2y ago

That's not just some bs - the other side of the coin is crooked billionaires and other reptilians taking advantage of anything in their way blinded by their massive greed and psycopathic traits. Excuse me, this is not how a society should roll. Not a sustainable one at least.

patapong 2y ago

In that case, VW being fined 17bn for dieselgate should also count as a trade barrier?