Comment

Comment by 3pt14159

The problem is that there is a lower floor of a $20m fine. Big corps can risk a 4% hit, but for anyone struggling to get a small startup off the ground the fine is too onerous.

As far as I'm concerned the process should be like this:

1. EU issues warning and cuts off traffic to the domain after 30 days.

2. Startup fixes GDPR compliance.

3. EU unblocks startup.

Only after the company breaks GDPR after getting unblocked should they be hit with this massive fine. For those of us that don't give a shit about Europe it's so frustrating having to worry about how we have to comply.

And before someone says something about "it's only for companies targeting the EU" that isn't as clear as people make it out to be. An errant ad, or a single conference talk, or even engagement on social media can be construed into requiring GDPR compliance.

But of course the reason the EU didn't want to block corporations flouting the GDPR technically is because they saw the arms race happening in China and decided that they didn't want a second firewall. So instead they went the lazy route and they pushed the whole mess on small startups that aren't the problem in the first place. Large corporations are the problem. The fundamental design of the internet and web is the problem.

parent 3pt14159 8 years ago

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton