In the next few weeks, up to 100 mobile application developers will be getting a letter from California's government ordering them to install privacy protection warnings on their apps or face the legal consequences. The letters warn that "an operator of a commercial Web site or online service that collects personally …
US law does not end at their border. It now applies worldwide. Better get used to it. Well, until the second revolution, of course.
I'll let you into a little secret. UK law does not end at our borders. Operators must also comply with our Data Protection Act and, just like California, we can fine those who don't comply. But, just like California, we might have a little difficulty collecting the fines from non-UK entities.
You do know we already tried that whole 'revolution' thing, back in 1860 or so? Didn't work out too well for us then, and I'm pretty sure it won't work for us now, or in the future.
So block California's IP range.
The US does that to us, so lets show them they need us more than we need them. :)
If we all pushed really, really hard, we just might be able to push California into the Pacific ocean.
Re: An idea
It's Arizona Bay I want to see...
Re: An idea
One can only hope Mr. San Andreas beats us to the punch.
Re: An idea
The San Andreas Fault is a right-lateral strike-slip transform fault. It skirts the left-most edge of Southern California, moving that edge in a north-north-west direction, with little or no separation from the North American Plate. It has absolutely zero chance of separating California from the Mainland. Unfortunately.
Also unfortunately, in several tens of millions of years, those of us in the Bay Area will have to put up with Long Beach & environs as neighbors ... Not that I'm losing sleep over it, mind ;-)
"You could stick a paragraph in there about users having to sacrifice their first-born to a graven image of Baal and virtually no-one would notice."
Pretty sure something similar to this has already been done to highlight how stupid EULAs are.
You first State of California.
Politicians == Pilliocians
Considering that the internet has been around for quite a number of years now, you would have thought that politicans and their ilk would have had some inkling of how it works and it's limitations.
All these attempts at controlling the internet just shows these people for being absolute pillocks. At least Kamala Harris has put his name on the list of those who should be first up against the wall and shot for being stupid.
Re: Politicians == Pilliocians
Her. Kamala is a her, not a him.
Just stick a note on the App Store page saying "not for sale to Californians"
Because that works SOOOOO well for US Export restrictions on software downloads
What should be controversial is the situation that the California law is trying to prevent: collecting crap on people with no indications of recourse and deletion policies.
Now, granted, California may have a tough time collecting a fine imposed on an entity that isn't located in California (or the US, come to that). But Kamala Harris presumable would factor that in before SHE prosecutes.
On the other hand, two of the larger App Stores are controlled by entities based in this state, so one could argue that, in return for (e.g.) Apples 30% slice of the proceeds, they get liability for letting bad actors into the walled garden. Which would soon result in Apple demanding privacy policies as a condition to being allowed through the gate. Which wouldn't be a bad thing for anyone (except scumbags, obvs).
Do most of the above posters actually think that multi-billion dollar multinational corporations collecting as much personal data on as many people as possible is a GOOD idea? The mind absolutely boggles!
Can only presume the disgruntled commentators have either not had their first cup of caffeinated beverage of the morning or are annoyed at having to add the extra code to their apps.
It's a rum pass when people complain about states enacting consumer protection law when it's such a modest requirement.
@ Malcolm Weir
"Which wouldn't be a bad thing for anyone"
It would create unnecessary work for a lot of app developers that don't collect any personal information. The submission process is enough of a PITA already, thank you very much, without having to hire a lawyer to write a privacy statement (AKA sending a canned privacy statement and charging me £200).
If you collect no personal information, compliance is easy: please use this draft.
THIS APP COLLECTS NO PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION.
Re: @ Malcolm Weir
Oh, dear grap!
No personal identification = NO RELEVANCE TO THIS TOPIC AT ALL. NOT EVEN A LITTLE.
So the poor widdle app developers who DON'T collect info aren't impacted at all. Those that do, should be.
Sorry this is sooooo confusing.
Gave me a good laugh...
"confirmed to be on Harris' little list of miscreants along with smaller application developers like"
Now, i can start my day!
Although, if this were in the 12 Colonies,
Some might wonder whether she had too much Kamala extract...
- Hi-torque tank engines: EXTREME car hacking with The Register
- Review What's MISSING on Amazon Fire Phone... and why it WON'T set the world alight
- Product round-up Ten excellent FREE PC apps to brighten your Windows
- Product round-up Trousers down for six of the best affordable Androids
- Why did it take antivirus giants YEARS to drill into super-scary Regin? Symantec responds...