Max Schrems: “Fundamental rights are usually available to everyone. How many people would still exercise their right to vote if they had to pay € 250 to do so? There were times when fundamental rights were reserved for the rich. It seems Meta wants to take us back for more than a hundred years.”
Is Facebook a fundamental right?
If Milei gets his way, you can go to Argentina!
In many situations, there are no alternatives if you want to participate in society. This is of course outrageous, but non the less a reality. I have managed to stay of Metas products since 2018, but I do not have children :)
No, but privacy is.
The EU protectionism around internet service is due to its lack of competitiveness in the whole internet economy. Or they might just outright start this trade war with US, and see how it goes.
EU and Member States thereof can also use less drastic means to compel people and companies to follow the law.
BTW we also retired capital punishment for people. We don't need 0/1 either-or constructs in law.
that doesnt sound good, no?
privacy laws must be enforced
i dont see how needing a email/phone number to register for something is related to anything were talking about.
Is right to privacy while using Facebook services a fundamental right? Well, given some of the services they own - maybe they should be. WhatsApp is massive in the EU, while Instagram seems to be the replacement for Twitter for a lot of people now that Twitter itself is flooded with fools that nobody likes to interact with. We've already had Facebook suprise drop a "EULA change" on WhatsApp users that let them use WA data in the Facebook algorithms. The specific field Facebook is even in makes it unusually hard to leave. It's somewhat socially acceptable to not have a Facebook account. Its less acceptable to not have an Instagram and I don't think you can function in west-european society without WhatsApp at the moment; basically everyone expects you to have it.
So yes, privacy when using Facebook is extremely important (GDPR literally exists to codify privacy as a right) and pay-or-okay is holding it hostage.
> It's somewhat socially acceptable to not have a Facebook account. Its less acceptable to not have an Instagram and I don't think you can function in west-european society without WhatsApp at the moment; basically everyone expects you to have it.
I can assure you that it is perfectly viable to live a normal life in a west-european society without using any Meta product. It gets a bit more difficult if you have kids at school, though, with teachers and parents not being flexible.
For example, parties are organized in Whatsapp group chats and the local library’s events are posted to Instagram.
> Facebook is the big corporation the GDPR was largely written to try and reign in
As I understand it, GDPR was to keep all the different EU member states' rules on the same page and up to date, and was continuing the same path that had already been stated with the Data Protection Directive in 1995: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Protection_Directive
Most of the core ideas were already present before Zuckerberg finished[0] high school.
[0] and possibly started, but I don't know how US schools work.
Actually GDPR text was largely written before shitting on Facebook became the cool kids thing.
The text was adopted by European Parliament in 2014. In 2011, EDPS publishes an opinion on political wants towards GDPR. It's very likely the text becomes written circa 2012-2013. That's waaaaay before any general public's disgruntlemnt with Facebook or any Big Tech giants. The public opinion against Big Tech starts to shift around 2015, after CJEU decides the so called "Google Spain" case (users being allowed to remove their search results from search engines). For reference, Cambridge Analytica story gets broken in 2018.
It is very likely that if GDPR was to be introduced today, the legal text would be much stricter and harsher. We need to realize that GDPR is a general data protection law. It does not prescribe industry-specific measures. It is written to apply to a bread baker so much as it is written to apply for a Big Tech giant. And that means race to the bottom in terms of legal standard.