|
|
|
|
|
by nawitus
3031 days ago
|
|
There's plenty of alternatives. The main problem with GDPR is not the goal of advocating privacy but the details. I would have done it like this: a) bring out regulation gradually instead of in a single big change like GDPR to have companies time to comply b) don't write vague laws c) give specific examples of what GDPR means in practice d) be more lenient on smaller companies |
|
b) the law had to cover a lot of usecases and in order to do that concisely, it may sound vague in places. I also don't like (developers never like uncertainty), but there's established practice already in regulators and courts about what is considered "adequate", "appropriate", etc. I agree it could've been better though.
c) that is happening already, e.g. ICO (the UK regulator) has a pretty good set of guidelines and examples. There's also the process of "prior consultation" where if you are not sure about something, you go ask your regulator for a decision
d) this is exactly what the "proportionate", "adequate", etc. are in for. If you are a small company with 2000 data records, you are not posing a high risk for the rights and freedoms of data subjects and so most of the things are not a strict requirement