|
No it applies to any organization offering data services/web sites to EU residents, including authorities. GDPR is only a regulation stating more explicitly what you're required (and were always required) to do for compliance with EU privacy laws. It obviously was needed since privacy violation has become so blatant. The GDPR legislation has been a long time in the making. It might be the case that privacy in Europe is being valued more than elsewhere in the world, I don't really know, but it's nothing new at all. For example, in Switzerland (not in EU but certainly with humanist and very old democratic and civil rights traditions) privacy in the form of banking secrecy is held in even higher esteem. Yes, as a collateral effect, some business models might not work in EU any longer, or not to the extent they used to (though ads and affiliation links had been on a race to the bottom anyway). But I'd say that's a win, or can be turned into a net benefit. Think about what the Web has become in the last 10-15 years. We still don't have reasonable micropayments, and nobody wants paywalls anyway, etc. The result has been the rise of "platforms" and monopolies where the user's data and attention is the product, with publishers of quality, nuanced content struggling or going out of business. While you of course don't owe dead-tree publishers anything, an economic model for content creation working for more people than it is now is still very much desired. If you're perceiving GDPR as trading barrier (even though it's just a privacy law), please also consider the US's total and utter failure to get their antitrust regulations in gear: Facebook buying WhatsApp, Google buying DoubleClick and YouTube, etc. At a certain point, others will have to react to that kind of government-sanctioned monopolization to protect their markets. |
The European Union also green lit those acquisitions. Hence the fines against Facebook for essentially lying to the European Commission about the merger.