Facebook policy wonk growls at Europe's mass of data laws Facebook's Brussels lobbyist Richard Allan took to the pages of the Pink 'Un on Wednesday morning to have a good old moan about "multiple" EU nations digging around the free content ad network's data-slurping biz practices. He complained that the actions of national privacy watchdogs within the 28-member-state bloc posed a …
Just what I was thinking, a whinging maggot trying to garner sympathy. Sorry but the world is a bigger place than the good ole' US of A and the world has lots of very small countries, and where they've combined they are all given a right to speak and make their own points. So this FB shill should realise that this the very epitomy of a democratic group like Europe, everyone gets a say! Don't like it FB? Then simply shutter up your website and don't allow anyone from a European IP to access it. Oh no, you won't do that as it would mean losing potentially a 1/4 to 1/3 of your "products" who won't be able to access the site. ( rough estimate of 600m in Europe ).
and where they've combined they are all given a right to speak and make their own points
Which is exactly why the sleazy filth in the unelected European Commission will sign us up for TTIP. We just can't have all this democracy crap stand in the way of businesses god given right to a guaranteed profit!
"businesses will instead have to comply with 28 independently shifting national variants. They would have to predict the enforcement agenda in each country."
You think 28 countries is a burden? Laddie, there are around 200 separate countries in the world, and once they all start applying their own data protection laws, you'll find out the hard way what it really means to call yourself a global organisation.
My heart bleeds.
El Reg, I think we need a spat dummy or flying teddy icon.
"businesses will instead have to comply with 28 independently shifting national variants. They would have to predict the enforcement agenda in each country."
That is actually complete twaddle, but I guess that's what he has to sell to keep the company's ability to con people out of their personal details alive.
There are a couple of very simple common elements to all those policies, and it is exactly the Article 29 working group's task to unify this. This is where Google screwed up royally as well: instead of dealing with the problem once (and that is finding a way to comply, not to try and screw things over), it now has the problem in all separate nations. The problem that Facebook has is not the fact that there are different policies out there, that is fluff for the press. The problem is that Facebook is nowhere near complying even with the most basic interpretation, because its business model is exactly based on breaking the law and disregarding its users' rights. That appears to be OK in the US, but not in Europe, and that is not news - those laws are very public.
Sadly for Facebook, "getting away with it" does not work here.
Of course if their business model did not consist of screwing every last cent out of whoring its users' data from advertiser to advertiser, maybe this would not be a problem?
Yes, it is free, and no I would not pay for it. Unless it really did offer privacy and respected laws outside of the USA.
Obviously that's why Facebook bases its worldwide non-US operations in one of the larger EU states, not in a small country with a population under 5m and a data protection regulator based in what looks much like a chip shop. Oh, wait...
Move back down to a 14" TeeVee. CRT no less, but I have to admit it was colour. 3 days later I did not notice the difference.
I suppose from a similar perspective I could live with 'less' of an Internet.
Then again I perhaps have not experienced the 'Full On FaceBook Experience'. I just occasionally come across a 'page' linked from somewhere else.
Do I have to 'sign up' to experience the 'Proper Crack Cocaine' version or would it be the 'same old, same old'?
These whining shites must surely live on a different planet from the rest of us. Every time I read about/hear of one of these types griping, I am driven to wonder how they managed to function in a world with real, enforceable rules that aren't necessarily to their liking.
I don't find that sort of behaviour appealing in my own small children, and nor do I tolerate it. So you can probably make a good guess what I'd say to Mr Crybaby Allen.
It makes me wonder, though, what they would say if they were indeed allowed to break the law if that implied others were able to do that too with respect to them without any consequences.
I'd give it about 5 minutes until the executives had their houses ransacked and were clubbed over the head outside for their watches and wallets.
Those rules are not exactly new, they just thought they could ignore them. Whinging about is seriously weak, and whinging in public is IMHO very stupid.
Speaking as someone who operates an American software company actively considering a corporate move to the EU, I can say that this kind of activity makes me want to move over there that much quicker.
The US technology sector has become a mine-field of conflicting US.gov policies, bizarre and corrupt tax system, and a casino banking culture - not to mention the general decline in qualified candidates who take software development seriously. The culture has been infected by this get-rich-quick hacker mentality, 18 year olds with some pissant Ruby project on Github are expecting to make millions in a year.
Being in the US trying to build quality software is like living in a banana republic. When I hear about how the EU is going after these crackpot companies like Uber and Facebook, I think good - the business environment won't be allowed to degrade into the circus that has become of Silicon Valley.
Please support your representatives as long as the policies are in the interests of the people and are applied consistently, I have no problem abiding by regulations as long as I can read and understand them, if it means all others have to abide by them as well.
Speaking as someone who operates an American software company actively considering a corporate move to the EU, I can say that this kind of activity makes me want to move over there that much quicker.
It may actually be your only option to still get revenue if it goes on like this - EU companies have to follow privacy laws too, and they're not going to buy services that put them in a position where they can be accused of breaking the law, which is the case by default with US located facilities. That's the big elephant in every Silicon Valley boardroom.
We've been asked to execute a few moves like this now - not by design, but as soon as we profiled the corporate legal exposures, the boards got nervous because there are not that many ways to reduce that exposure other than moving the company HQ, main functions and service platforms (usually, a sales & support subsidiary is left behind to offer local support). As a former US company it is easier to retain access to the US market and also sell to the EU than it is for a US based company to sell into Europe, so the next step is usually gaining shareholder agreements and then planning the migration.
It's quite an exercise to do it right, so good luck with your move.
Dear mister Allan:
Most of the policies will overlap, with exceptions only on the side of more citizen's privacy. You can either design your systems so they can serve/request a different combination of customer's data, personal data and services to every country. Good luck with that!
Or you can design your systems and your revenue streams so as not to interfere with citizens basic rights.
Or better yet, you can just sod off!
But don't worry, Mr. Allan, because yours won't be the only quango suffering under those new laws. Misery loves company. :-)
Yours truly: Cptn. Obvious.
I find the idea of someone being in the House of Lords and also being a director at Facebook (or any major company) a horrible conflict of interests.
Nah, it's a sequence error. The normal process is that you first help such companies in your official role, and later get a cushy job as non-executive on their board. Doing it together is either bad planning or may have to do with the more advanced age of some people in the House of Lords..
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
