|
|
|
|
|
|
by jimnotgym
3029 days ago
|
|
|
a) It is not a big change from the 1995 regulation. It is incremental. There is a feeling that the previous regulation lacked teeth with the multinationals, some of whom have chosen to ignore it. Facebook have lost two cases over aggregating data in Belgium and Germany in the last month. b) I don't know if you are familiar with European law, but what you see as vague is what others see as flexibility. Laws setting out the spirit of what you are trying to achieve tend to age better than a rule based approach. c) They did [0]. Because of b) it is not part of the regulation itself. d) They were under the existing regulation, so why wouldn't they be now? The 'vagueness' as you put it gives a judge considerable flexibility to see if the steps taken to safeguard privacy were appropriate to your size edit:add reference
[0]:https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/refo... |
|
|