5 ms·

HTTP 451 "We recognise you are attempting to access this website from a country belonging to the European Economic Area (EEA) including the EU which enforces t

by groby_b 6mo ago

HTTP 451 "We recognise you are attempting to access this website from a country belonging to the European Economic Area (EEA) including the EU which enforces the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and therefore cannot grant you access at this time. For any issues, e-mail us at info@franklinnews.org or call us at (847) 497-5230." This is extremely funny given it's an article about privacy concerns :)

embedding-shape 6mo ago
I love seeing this, and love seeing regulations working exactly as wanted! What I see is basically "We're unable to serve this website without compromising your privacy, so instead of pretending or giving you a choice, we give you this message so you can turn around".
- ciupicri 6mo ago
  Right... as if can trust some random American or other non-European website that it really respects the law. What are you gonna do if it breaks the GDPR law? GDPR ruined the Internet.
  - master-lincoln 6mo ago
    I'd argue greedy capitalists ruined it. They were also the cause of GDPR
    - philipallstar 6mo ago
      They also built it out.
- troad 6mo ago
  > "We're unable to serve this website without compromising your privacy... " More accurately, "we do not have the staff or funds to figure out what every single random law around the globe requires of us, and since foreign countries are not a realistic advertising market for a local Michigan newspaper, there's really no reason for us to try."
  - embedding-shape 6mo ago
    Well, you don't have to do any of that stuff if you either are upfront about selling user data and ask if it's OK, or if you just don't do that stuff at all.
    - troad 6mo ago
      European law imposes a great deal more obligations on a business than that. This claim is simplistic to the point of disingenuousness.
      - embedding-shape 6mo ago
        Since obviously there is no "European law" in the first place, I think it's pretty safe to assume you have no idea what you're talking about.
        Ylpertnodi 6mo ago
        Interpol would like a word.
        embedding-shape 6mo ago
        > Interpol would like a word. Also not a "European law" by any measure or understanding, that's a international organization that does police cooperation across the continent (and further), it isn't even a law enforcement agency... Not exactly sure how you could confuse that with laws, but here we are.
        throwaway920102 6mo ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Markets_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Markets_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Services_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Services_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regula... Here are three.
- ataru 6mo ago
  It's illegal for us to steal from you, so we won't invite you inside.
- hypeatei 6mo ago
  What does GDPR get you that browser settings and an extension don't? I'm genuinely curious how random websites refusing to serve content / spamming cookie banners is a good thing? The data download and removal side of GDPR seems useful for more "entrenched" use cases where you have an account and a long history on a service but... fly-by website visits should not be this heavily regulated. Blocking cookies and scripts is trivial.
  - colejohnson66 6mo ago
    I should not need extensions for a business to respect my privacy. It's as simple as that. If you look at it through an equity angle, needing extensions relegates the negative effects to those that are already not "well off" — the technologically illiterate who don't know what to do or know someone who does.
    - hypeatei 6mo ago
      So someone's refusal to make a couple clicks to install an extension necessitates: 1) millions of users having to click to get the annoying popup off their screen, 2) installing an extension to block those anyway, and 3) a more fractured internet where website operators outright refuse to serve content because of liability? I'd bet a very large sum of money that the technologically illiterate don't read anything on those popups and click "Accept all cookies"
      - 3form 6mo ago
        How does someone's refusal to install an extension necessitate millions of users having to close the popup? I guess you mean someone as in "vast majority of population"?
    - Minor49er 6mo ago
      Why is the government making efforts to increase technological literacy not an option?
      - 6mo ago
- DeathArrow 6mo ago
  Or "we don't care about respecting stupid laws in your country. If you don't like being blocked, take the issue to your politicians."
  - embedding-shape 6mo ago
    But that's the thing, making them outright say "we don't care about respecting stupid laws in your country" (which for us means "we need to continue to be able to sell user data without notifying we do this") is not an "issue", that's the whole benefit of it in the first place. Anyways, it sounds like a win-win here, they get to not care, and we get to be rejected with clear reasons why, so again, benefits all around.
plandis 6mo ago
A US based non-profit news organization isn’t going to spend money to pay lawyers to ensure they meet a regulatory burden that doesn’t affect their core demographic.
- deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]
- embedding-shape 6mo ago
  Neither are they gonna lose the potential of getting the data of any of their visitors, hence they're in this catch-22.
- wongarsu 6mo ago
  A burden that's proportional to how much user data you mine, process and/or share with third parties. Hence the irony
- Ylpertnodi 6mo ago
  > A US based non-profit news organization isn’t going to spend money to pay lawyers to ensure they meet a regulatory burden that doesn’t affect their core demographic. I like being covered by gdpr. Though I really cannot see any country's gdpr peops taking anyone in the US to court. A very simple "Fuck you" (along the lines of The Pirate Bay) would end any legal conversations. It would be different if the news organisation had an office in the EU. Anyway, i have a vpn, so....
  - bombcar 6mo ago
    The UK is not part of the US (yet?) nor the EU, but they're currently fining US companies - it doesn't surprise me at all that many take the easy answer of "ban them by IP".
    - msla 6mo ago
      > The UK is not part of the US (yet?) nor the EU, but they're currently fining US companies Are they going after money they have in the UK or are they delusional enough to think they can successfully fine a company with no ties to the UK?
DeathArrow 6mo ago
I wonder why do they censor the content? It's not like the EU can enforce GDPR in US.
- deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]

by groby_b 6mo ago

embedding-shape 6mo ago

I love seeing this, and love seeing regulations working exactly as wanted! What I see is basically "We're unable to serve this website without compromising your privacy, so instead of pretending or giving you a choice, we give you this message so you can turn around".

ciupicri 6mo ago
Right... as if can trust some random American or other non-European website that it really respects the law. What are you gonna do if it breaks the GDPR law? GDPR ruined the Internet.
- master-lincoln 6mo ago
  I'd argue greedy capitalists ruined it. They were also the cause of GDPR
  - philipallstar 6mo ago
    They also built it out.
troad 6mo ago
> "We're unable to serve this website without compromising your privacy... " More accurately, "we do not have the staff or funds to figure out what every single random law around the globe requires of us, and since foreign countries are not a realistic advertising market for a local Michigan newspaper, there's really no reason for us to try."
- embedding-shape 6mo ago
  Well, you don't have to do any of that stuff if you either are upfront about selling user data and ask if it's OK, or if you just don't do that stuff at all.
  - troad 6mo ago
    European law imposes a great deal more obligations on a business than that. This claim is simplistic to the point of disingenuousness.
    - embedding-shape 6mo ago
      Since obviously there is no "European law" in the first place, I think it's pretty safe to assume you have no idea what you're talking about.
      - Ylpertnodi 6mo ago
        Interpol would like a word.
        embedding-shape 6mo ago
        > Interpol would like a word. Also not a "European law" by any measure or understanding, that's a international organization that does police cooperation across the continent (and further), it isn't even a law enforcement agency... Not exactly sure how you could confuse that with laws, but here we are.
      - throwaway920102 6mo ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Markets_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Markets_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Services_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Services_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regula... Here are three.
ataru 6mo ago
It's illegal for us to steal from you, so we won't invite you inside.
hypeatei 6mo ago
What does GDPR get you that browser settings and an extension don't? I'm genuinely curious how random websites refusing to serve content / spamming cookie banners is a good thing? The data download and removal side of GDPR seems useful for more "entrenched" use cases where you have an account and a long history on a service but... fly-by website visits should not be this heavily regulated. Blocking cookies and scripts is trivial.
- colejohnson66 6mo ago
  I should not need extensions for a business to respect my privacy. It's as simple as that. If you look at it through an equity angle, needing extensions relegates the negative effects to those that are already not "well off" — the technologically illiterate who don't know what to do or know someone who does.
  - hypeatei 6mo ago
    So someone's refusal to make a couple clicks to install an extension necessitates: 1) millions of users having to click to get the annoying popup off their screen, 2) installing an extension to block those anyway, and 3) a more fractured internet where website operators outright refuse to serve content because of liability? I'd bet a very large sum of money that the technologically illiterate don't read anything on those popups and click "Accept all cookies"
    - 3form 6mo ago
      How does someone's refusal to install an extension necessitate millions of users having to close the popup? I guess you mean someone as in "vast majority of population"?
  - Minor49er 6mo ago
    Why is the government making efforts to increase technological literacy not an option?
    - 6mo ago
DeathArrow 6mo ago
Or "we don't care about respecting stupid laws in your country. If you don't like being blocked, take the issue to your politicians."
- embedding-shape 6mo ago
  But that's the thing, making them outright say "we don't care about respecting stupid laws in your country" (which for us means "we need to continue to be able to sell user data without notifying we do this") is not an "issue", that's the whole benefit of it in the first place. Anyways, it sounds like a win-win here, they get to not care, and we get to be rejected with clear reasons why, so again, benefits all around.

plandis 6mo ago

A US based non-profit news organization isn’t going to spend money to pay lawyers to ensure they meet a regulatory burden that doesn’t affect their core demographic.

deleted 6mo ago
[deleted]
embedding-shape 6mo ago
Neither are they gonna lose the potential of getting the data of any of their visitors, hence they're in this catch-22.
wongarsu 6mo ago
A burden that's proportional to how much user data you mine, process and/or share with third parties. Hence the irony
Ylpertnodi 6mo ago
> A US based non-profit news organization isn’t going to spend money to pay lawyers to ensure they meet a regulatory burden that doesn’t affect their core demographic. I like being covered by gdpr. Though I really cannot see any country's gdpr peops taking anyone in the US to court. A very simple "Fuck you" (along the lines of The Pirate Bay) would end any legal conversations. It would be different if the news organisation had an office in the EU. Anyway, i have a vpn, so....
- bombcar 6mo ago
  The UK is not part of the US (yet?) nor the EU, but they're currently fining US companies - it doesn't surprise me at all that many take the easy answer of "ban them by IP".
  - msla 6mo ago
    > The UK is not part of the US (yet?) nor the EU, but they're currently fining US companies Are they going after money they have in the UK or are they delusional enough to think they can successfully fine a company with no ties to the UK?

DeathArrow 6mo ago

I wonder why do they censor the content? It's not like the EU can enforce GDPR in US.

deleted 6mo ago
[deleted]