GDPR violation

Additionally, the firefighter example is a little off. That is not really a product.

There's something called the "Democracy of Defacation" if you will. This is the concept that the wealthy in the town have to pay for sewer services for even the poor else they still end up with crap everywhere. There are some things that you need other people to have even if your motives are completely self centered.

The same it is with fire. I don't necessarily have to help put out the fire at your house from altruistic reasons. Even if I don't like you and don't care for your house, I still have to help you put it out lest it catch my house on fire.

As for EMTs and ambulance rides, well those definitely aren't free. Those are actually pretty pricey. You may live in a country where you don't directly see the bill, but that doesn't mean you don't pay the price.

ballscrewbob:
Anyone for moving this to BAR SPORT ?

i belive the GDPR issue is valid and shoudl say there, but there is a bunch of messages that can be cut off and moved to the bar

From the news i saw the first GDPR violation fine are landing, and with them it should be a little bit clearer where is the limit of what can and cant be done

it should be a little bit clearer where is the limit of what can and cant be done

LOL ok whatever you say...All it does is set a bar and this "gdpr" can lawfully be broken by methods above the bar which is what we have mostly all said.

So when you cant get on your favourite web sites because you do not accept thier policy please dont come running here and cry foul. In essence that's about the lowest they can go.

"Dont like it fine go look elsewhere we are complying with your rule thing." will be the new benchmark.

Maybe is my broken english, but to me seems like you are making fun of me and my opinion.

You are a moderator, you should not need me to moderate you ::slight_smile:

you may be ok or not ok with the law, you problem, but is there and state the use have to make an informate decision, and i believe it is not clear as can be, with little effort.

I am also allowed an opinion.
Unless that was withdrawn by the EU ?
In which case I am pulling out my Canadian card on the topic.

Others besides myself have pointed out how crazy this rule is as there are so many ways around it.
As with many other laws created in many cases to suit things those in charge often do not have any understanding in.

Std banana straightness. Std Cabbage size, Your country will take how ever many refugees we deem acceptable. We will spend the money you pay into the EU as we see fit including wine for our pleasure only.

The only thing we agree on is a right to privacy...I take mine into my own hands and don't expect it handed to me on a dirty unwashed plate with god only knows what else on there.

ballscrewbob:
I am also allowed an opinion.

yes you are, but I feel you are personally attacking me, and that is NOT an opinion, but harassment, and coming from a mod, abuse of power.

Anyway, talking to a friend he managed to point out the article 32:

(32)
Consent should be given by a clear affirmative act establishing a freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous indication of the data subject's agreement to the processing of personal data relating to him or her, such as by a written statement, including by electronic means, or an oral statement. This could include ticking a box when visiting an internet website, choosing technical settings for information society services or another statement or conduct which clearly indicates in this context the data subject's acceptance of the proposed processing of his or her personal data.
Silence, pre-ticked boxes or inactivity should not therefore constitute consent.
Consent should cover all processing activities carried out for the same purpose or purposes. When the processing has multiple purposes, consent should be given for all of them. If the data subject's consent is to be given following a request by electronic means, the request must be clear, concise and not unnecessarily disruptive to the use of the service for which it is provided.

in particular the passage in red is our case, a pre-ticked box to maximum consent.

Therefore the selection is not GDPR compliant and should be fixed.

It is certainly not an attack on you but one on the stupidity of EU regulations which in many cases can be obsolete before they even pass. And in many other cases should not even have been a "thing".

The internet is GLOBAL so not everyone has to abide by the EU rules.
Does that mean you will only use EU web sites ?

What if a site is REGISTERED outside the EU but the company also has an office in the EU does it have to abide by its regular main office or some piddly little place in the EU ?

this is not the point.

The point is that the Arduino forum does not comply with the GDPR regulations, as clearly demonstrated by the posted article.

What does the Arduino team intend to do?
What does Massimo Banzi think of this thing?

Arduino is a project born in Italy, then in the EU, and has always put the respect of all the rules in the first place.

What is your personal opinion on the European laws on the protection of privacy is not important and it is OT.

Actually my point of view is very valid.

Arduino being registered in the US and Switzerland.
The US has differing views and standpoints on GDPR
Switzerland also has some points to offer on the GDPR

EDIT.

There are multiple stories of companies closing down European sites of operation due to the GDPR and multiple sites now blacklisting EU access to thier website along with many also doing a TAKE IT or LEAVE IT approach to site entry.

Web splintering caused for the most part by the EU in this instance.

I can only repeat that your point if view is OT here.

Arduino do not respect the GDPR. This is the point.

If Arduino team want do an "ArduExit" there is no problem, a company can do all that it want, but if Arduino want remain in the EU market it must respect the GDPR

testato:
I can only repeat that your point if view is OT here.

Arduino do not respect the GDPR. This is the point.

If Arduino team want do an "ArduExit" there is no problem, a company can do all that it want, but if Arduino want remain in the EU market it must respect the GDPR

So why are you complaining to other USERS and not to the Arduino team?

yes you are, but I feel you are personally attacking me, and that is NOT an opinion, but harassment, and coming from a mod, abuse of power.

Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean that they are attacking you. Your last name isn't Trump is it?

Thanks Delta..

It is a "forum" post and that to my mind makes it somewhat of a discussion topic.
I certainly dont mean to attack anyone.
Jibes are at the futility of the rule and that it is probably circumvent-able with ease and even more so considering where the company is registered.

Also saying that Arduino cannot be in the EU market unless they comply is I find quite misleading and not totally factual.

Delta_G:
So why are you complaining to other USERS and not to the Arduino team?

This section IS the section to report this kind of issue, AFAIK.

I open a post to move the OT, so this remain clean (sorry i forgot to post the link there when i open it up): GDPR: will save the world, or kill the internet? - Bar Sport - Arduino Forum so DeltaG ill answer there.

lestofante:
This section IS the section to report this kind of issue, AFAIK.

It is also the section to "DISCUSS" such topics and having parts of them moved to a non relevant section because you don't / wont, want to deal with it by actually talking about it is a bigger problem.

I am all for keeping a thread clean and on topic.
Relevant points have been raised about the origins of Arduinos current company registration and its quite possible use to choose to either comply or not comply with a rule that most general internet users are actually either unaware of or dont care about as in my case I find its origin to be without real merit.

Given the current state of the EU (somewhat in free-fall) I can well see why such rules force many business out from the web or to use alternate web sources to deploy stores etc.

its quite possible use to choose to either comply or not comply with a rule

if they don't want to comply is better they obscure the service or they WILL incur in fines. you can be against that law, but that does not make arduino company above it.

I believe the rest of the post is your opinion on the argument, so ill answer in the OT section. Here please stick to fact.

As quoted on the other post, from the about them being swiss i actually read the page and i cite (in red the important part):

  1. The GDPR applies to data processing by Swiss companies if they deliver goods or provide services to end customers in the EU - WRONG or INACCURATE
    It is not the provision of goods or services that triggers the applicability of the GDPR. Rather, the offering of goods or services (with or without a payment) to end customers (individuals) in the EU (or in the EEA) makes the corresponding processing of personal data subject to the GDPR

so the difference is about provision and offering, and arduino is offering the service directly: by passing trought a 3rd party it would be just provision (and the GDRP would be enforced on the third party)

Now that you have read that and picked out a particular section how about a few of the other points mentioned in the article.

On another aspect
In particular what is the forum offering in terms of goods or services ?
I believe it would be hard to classify FREE HELP and ADVICE given FREELY by VOLUNTEERS as a service as no money changes hands.
The software is also offered FREELY (DONATIONS ACCEPTED)

I only know of two parts of the site that offer goods or services
One being the store which is seperated into two distinct sections
The other being the online Editor serves for both private and EDU which I believe is hosted on AMAZON T3 Stateside.

I have not had occasion to shop on the side that covers parts of the EU only the Americana side.
So I cannot tell if the other side comply or not.

You can continue to keep two threads going if you wish but I find it goes against the rules as such and consider that they should be re- merged

so the difference is about provision and offering, and arduino is offering the service directly: by passing trought a 3rd party it would be just provision (and the GDRP would be enforced on the third party)

Opinion or fact ?

ballscrewbob:
Now that you have read that and picked out a particular section how about a few of the other points mentioned in the article.

Because THAT is the interesting part, the rest talk about other stuff not related.

If you ask me about PWM generation, i will point out to the section on the DS and cite what is the important register/configuration, not all the DS.....

ballscrewbob:

so the difference is about provision and offering, and arduino is offering the service directly: by passing trought a 3rd party it would be just provision (and the GDRP would be enforced on the third party)

Opinion or fact ?

fact, " the offering of goods or services [...] to end customers [...] in the EU", what is not clear in this?
I'll make another example, all news website from US are probably using server is US, but they all display GDPR/cookie consent or are geoblocked. I must agree they are not all 100% compliant, as many EU website still, but the first fines have landed, so we should see a gradual change there.

In particular what is the forum offering in terms of goods or services ?

this request form is website related, so it cover even shop and forum; but even the download section, the new section, and there reference is a service; they are offering information. If you displaying a static page, that try to identify and track single user information, that would fall under GDPR. Again, the "service" name is used, because GDPR does not apply ONLY on internet, if the supermarket try to track your face to see how many time and how long you go there, they would fall under GDPR!

To have an idea of the fine so far, and the reasons why they are given, see here: GDPR fines: The story so far

The software is also offered FREELY

Being free does not exclude you from the law, I quote: "offering of goods or services (with or without a payment)"

Actually a lot of that Swiss article is RELATED you cannot just pick parts out to suit your argument.

Moving along... So only 29% of companies compliant according to your link.
Did not see any international fines either. Only EU from your link others were guesses

I see according to YOUR interpretation that you included the FORUM.
Based on that analogy would seem to indicate that if somebody offered a piece of paper (blank forum) and posted a question then whoever offered the paper would be liable. Anyone else writing on that paper would also make the person who offered that paper liable too ! If that sounds crazy its an easy analogy to make.

Do honestly think you are taking the view of this crazy law to an extreme.
Are you sure GEOBLOCKING is the only way forward for you ?
The reverse of that is happening with DVD's as it turned out to cost more to produce and people just found ways around it..

IMHO more education to end users would be a better method. After all I look after the security and safety of my home and truck.

Where does the money go from those fines ?