Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by manigandham 2592 days ago
When you go to the library and check out a book, do they ask for money instead of PII?

A business is free to choose their compensation model. Your choice is to not engage if you don't want it, not to demand it for free regardless.
2 comments
NeedMoreTea 2592 days ago
The fact remains that the law states you may not do that, and that you must provide the same service - if it's provided "free" with data gathering - without that personal data gathering for those who don't wish to opt-in, and if memory serves not in a degraded manner.

Continue to do so and face the possible consequences, close doors or leave the market, or find an alternative way. Just as happens with other laws.

Businesses are not completely free to choose their compensation model - many places have long standing laws against unreasonable rates of interest or other illegal terms, discrimination etc. This is just another more recent limit.

link
Thiez 2592 days ago
> A business is free to choose their compensation model.

But they are not. Your compensation model generally cannot include such things as slavery, child labour, prostitution... Many places place limits on the amount of interest that may be charged on a loan.

A business is free to choose their compensation model within the confines of what the law allows. In case of the GDPR it disallows paying through PII. Thus a business is not free to choose this model.

link
manigandham 2592 days ago
But the law does allow for ads as payment. GDPR only regulates consent and privacy, not business models, and absolutely allows for PII as payment as long as consent is obtained and data is secure.

However it can't force a company that requires data to be processed for a service to still provide that service when the data is not consented to. That is impossible without breaking the very law that prevents it.

This whole thread is just people refusing that data can be necessary for the service, which is fine if that's your interpretation, but not what major law firms actually agree on and it's certainly not going to hold up in court.

link
pbhjpbhj 2592 days ago
>people refusing that data can be necessary for the service //

I'm failing to understand how Techcrunch's provision of articles is impossible without my provision of PII, they seem to manage to display those articles to other people even when I don't give them _my_ PII.

It sounds like someone is confused as to what essential means; it doesn't mean "carry on using the same privacy infringing business model regardless".

link
manigandham 2592 days ago
It displays the articles to other people using their PII to pay for it. Essential because of compensation is allowed, and you have the choice to not view anything. There is nothing you’re losing, but you’re not entitled to demand content either.

HN users should contact a law firm instead of being self appointed lawyers downvoting everything they misunderstand.

link
pbhjpbhj 2590 days ago
You've shown that Techcrunch requires paying, you've not shown it requires PII. The service has to actually need PII, and not be able to reasonably offer it without.

Do I need your insurance renewal dates before I can serve you a pint of beer? No. But if I had them I might be able to give you slightly cheaper beer (and feed back to the insurance company that you drink beer; a fact they might use to increase your insurance). So, under GDPR can I refuse to serve beer to people who won't give up PII, no, I have to come up with another way to ensure payment, like asking for money, or advertising to you without PII, or ...

link