• DasRubberDuck@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      68
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I read that as you being facetious, but: Yes this is exactly what I want. If a service can not comply with GDPR, the service should not be accessible. It would be great for their customers if the service decided to change their practices to become compliant, but that is a business decision they need to make.

      • Pechente@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Adding to that: Compliance is not even that hard to implement. I build almost all of my websites with GDPR compliance in mind and it’s not really a big deal. There are easy to use tools like Cookie Consent and some of the sites don’t even need a banner at all if they have no tracking (which you know, is completely possible too).

        • WhipTheLlama@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Cookie consent is the tip of the iceberg for GDPR compliance. If you’re not collecting any user data for any reason, such as account creation, then you’re probably ok with cookie consent, but GDPR is non trivial to comply with for companies collecting personal data.

      • betwixthewires@lemmy.basedcount.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well I’m only being facetious insomuch as the OP is annoyed at a perfectly predictable outcome of laws that Europeans wanted. I’m very critical of the GDPR, I do want laws that prevent data harvesting but I just don’t think the GDPR was the right approach.

    • FMT99@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not “can’t comply” but “doesn’t want to comply”. Other than that fully agreed, it is what I wanted.

    • WhipTheLlama@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      anyone who can’t comply can’t serve you.

      That’s not true. If the company isn’t doing business in the EU, they don’t need to comply with the GDPR. What I mean is, they’re entirely outside the jurisdiction of the EU and are not required to comply with any EU law. If the EU decides they want to force a non-EU company to comply, they have no ability to do so.

    • aksdb@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s for the greater good, but it’s also somewhat against the intention of the law, IMO.

      Dataprotection is meant to give users control of their data. A restriction like that takes away a bit of my control, however, since it prevents me from doing whatever the fuck I want with my data.

      But again: greater good. It also protects people who don’t know what they are doing.