SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Many US news sites have yet to comply with the EU's General Data Protection Regulation after more than two months, leaving European visitors blocked.
Digital outlets run by Tronc, Lee Enterprises and GateHouse Media are among the hundreds of US news websites that remain unavailable within the EU, according to NiemanLab.
The General Data Protection Regulation, also known as GDPR, is designed to give the EU's 500 million citizens greater control over how their information is used online. Adopted in April 2016, its provisions became directly applicable in EU member states after a two-year transitional period.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Hundreds of US News Sites Unavailable in Europe Two Months After GDPR
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 55 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Frankfort, Kentucky, makes it against the law to shoot off a policeman's tie.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by canopic jug on Friday August 10 2018, @04:20AM (18 children)
A better title might have been, "Hundreds of US News Sites Operating Illegally Via the US Two Months After GDPR". The sites where shown where they were breaking the law and how to come into compliance. They had several years to comply but chose not to. This is not about sites being blocked but of continued illegal operation in regards to abuse of data concerning EU citizens. So they are going out of their way to break the law and if they wanted to reach a wider audience, it would actually be less work to not harvest and sell data illegally.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Friday August 10 2018, @04:25AM (1 child)
Why are they so afraid?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by canopic jug on Friday August 10 2018, @04:30AM
If they start offering a better class of service to European visitors, then they'd lose reputation and support from US visitors which would affect their bottom line even more. They're already taking a small hit by cutting out some of their market, those in the EU. However, mostly it comes down to MBAs being MBAs and trying to double down on stupitidy and their everything-must-be-made-tos-suck idelology.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 10 2018, @04:28AM (2 children)
If sites like Facebook, which are privacy nightmares even for users and non-users alike, are still allowed to exist as they are, then even the GDPR doesn't go far enough. I wish the US could do something similar to Europe, but as we all know, it's a fundamental right to violate others' privacy on a massive scale.
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Friday August 10 2018, @01:34PM (1 child)
The thing is, the new law should allow you to force Facebook to delete every detail they have on you.
Right to be forgotten may primarily have been used by unscrupulous people trying to cover up their past misdeeds, but it's supposed to let you escape the claws of facebook should you decide to do so.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 10 2018, @10:32PM
I think that is an artefact of the reporting, people that don't abuse the law aren't going to make the headlines.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 10 2018, @04:43AM (8 children)
Are you claiming that the sites that block access from the EU are violating the GDPR? Their lawyers seem to disagree.
Let's not forget the laws of the United States, of China, of Saudi Arabia, etc. Some European websites, I'm sure, are "still operating illegally" according to those laws and your apparent criterion.
(Score: 5, Informative) by janrinok on Friday August 10 2018, @08:54AM (7 children)
No, I read it as US news sites are exploiting the data of anyone who accesses their site. However, as they cannot do that with the data of EU citizens, they simply don't give them access.
The fact that Americans are happy for this state of affairs to exist is not a problem for Europeans.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 10 2018, @04:40PM (2 children)
The OP makes the unsupported claim that the sites are "operating illegally." I want
to know exactly what they're doing that's supposedly illegal. Your response doesn't
answer that, unless you're implying that for a U.S. website to gather data on non-EU
people violates the GDPR. If that's what you mean, just say it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 10 2018, @05:40PM (1 child)
OP is claiming the sites are operating illegally with regards to GDPR - if Europeans can access the sites. From a US standpoint, there is nothing illegal with gathering and selling any and all information about US site visitors. In the US we are simply cattle with valuable data.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 10 2018, @06:25PM
First sentence of the summary says that European visitors are blocked. The website operators are doing the blocking. That's the gist of the story. We all know that blocks can be circumvented. That doesn't mean the site operators aren't making a good-faith effort. Where's the evidence that they're not acting in good faith, that Europeans can readily access their sites?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 10 2018, @04:54PM (3 children)
The key claim the OP is making is that the sites are "operating
illegally." The OP offered no support for the claim. I asked for at
least a clarification of it. Exactly what are these websites doing
that's supposedly illegal? The site owners, presumably, think that
blocking access from Europe puts them in compliance with the GDPR. The
OP seems to think they're violating it, or some other unspecified law.
Your response doesn't address that, unless you're implying that for
a U.S. website to gather data on non-EU people somehow violates the
GDPR. If that's what you mean, just say it.
>The fact that Americans are happy for this state of affairs to exist
is not a problem for Europeans.
For hundreds of U.S. news sites to be unavailable to Europeans isn't a
problem for Europeans? Then why submit the story?
(Score: 4, Interesting) by janrinok on Friday August 10 2018, @05:33PM (2 children)
The law was announced and came into effect in 2016. However, the EU announced that they would give those holding data on EU citizens would be given time to sort themselves out. Nevertheless, even as the cut off date for the full compliance with the law was reached earlier this year many US companies had taken no action to reach any compliance. During all of that time they were technically 'breaking the law' although they probably knew that no formal legal action would be taken. The reason that they have prevented access to their sites is because they are still abusing personal data, or at least not protecting it, to an extent that is now be illegal under the GDPR if it was done to Europeans.
Because it seems quite strange to us in the rest of the world that US citizens view the abuse of their personal data as something that they have to accept and is entirely normal. Perhaps you have missed the concern in the US of the abuse of data by, say, social media? The 'loss' of US news sites probably hasn't been noticed by most Europeans. US news is viewed here as often being very US centric to the extent that it seems to ignore other important events happening elsewhere in the world - but that is not for us to address.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 10 2018, @06:53PM
"Because it seems quite strange to us in the rest of the world that US citizens view the abuse of their personal data as something that they have to accept and is entirely normal. "
europeans: the original patronizing yankees. yes, we have a certain unfortunate percentage of ignorant bleeting sheople in this country, but i fail to see how EU chattle are any better. the vast majority of your people are run by scum just like the US. just b/c your rulers sit in brussels and act like legitimately elected representatives of the people is irrelevant.
(Score: 2) by legont on Saturday August 11 2018, @04:20AM
The logic probably goes like this. If a US website implements the European law and makes a mistake, it may be costly. The implementation is also costly. European visitors don't bring enough money and don't fit the model. The best course of action - forget Europe even exists and block it forever.
While I actually on your side, you got to realize that the US is an island and does not give a flying shit about anybody else. Before WWII the US did not give a shit and did not participate; after the WWII the US dictates but still does not give a shit. BTW, the chances are the US will go back to the before WWII state pretty soon.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by epitaxial on Friday August 10 2018, @07:55PM (3 children)
How does a US based site operate illegally in another country?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by jmorris on Friday August 10 2018, @09:22PM (2 children)
Some have operations in many countries even if their primary point of presence is in the U.S. Which means transnationals now operate under an increasing disadvantage of having to obey the union set of every insane law in every jurisdiction they have a presence in. Great for giving a boost to smaller companies with presence in only one jurisdiction. For example, Gab.ai is entirely based in the U.S. so they simply announced they would be entirely ignoring the GDPR and the E.U. could pound sand. The E.U. could probably force the banks to reveal their Subjects who do business with Gab and punish them but it would quickly become a PR disaster. They could also implement a Great Firewall and block access, again a PR disaster. If you do not open an office inside the E.U. there really isn't much they can do other than bluster.
But the only way to parse the original poster is to translate it to English as "The U.S. is illegal and illegitimate, so are all other puny countries, even those in Europe. Only (((globalist))) transnational entities like the E.U. and the U.N. have legitimacy. Their superior laws should be enforced worldwide." A U.S. company obeying U.S. laws can't, by definition, be illegal so the only way to parse xir's comment is to presume them/they believes EU law is legitimate and should control worldwide while U.S. law is inferior and illegitimate.
(Score: 2) by legont on Saturday August 11 2018, @04:31AM (1 child)
Well, lets look at another example. Aviation laws and regulations down to how an airplane is supposed to be maintained and pilots trained are pretty much the same everywhere. Why? Because FAA does not allow any company to fly to the US if they are not compliant with the US laws even when they fly abroad. The US is a big market, the rules are reasonable, so everybody complies.
Now Europe decided to similarly push Internet laws (perhaps good - does not matter). The US companies current reply - screw you - you are not significant. It would be interesting to see how it all evolves. I am waiting for China to start enforcing certain rules on everybody...
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Saturday August 11 2018, @04:51AM
Exactly why ICANN should have never been turned over to the UN. And why the EU should be told to pound sand. When the U.S. regulates something, after some period of being stupid, it usually gets it mostly right, especially technical standards. Everybody figures the FAA's rules might not be 100% what they would have written but everybody can live with it. Nobody builds out a B brand airline that only operates outside the U.S. And when ICANN ran the Internet a few people bitched but everybody was content enough they wanted in on the thing. The Internet is, after all, one of the three Wonder of the 20th Century along with The Bomb and the Moon Landing and it got that way while ICANN was being managed by the USG.
Now every tinpot dictator is angling to impose their vision on the Internet, starting with the ones in Brussels. Just wait until the real shitholes start regulating. Do you wanna live with the regs the Organization of the Islamic Conference push through some UN Committee?