maynarkh

joined 1 year ago
[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 2 points 8 months ago

But they do. Individual action can't right systematic wrongs.

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I wonder if this means the whole EGS will have a mobile equivalent. Then Steam. I could do with Steam on mobile.

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I was going to write a long ass answer to this, but tbh I'm tired of you asking and me answering the same question over and over again while not providing any source for your claims.

  • Lemmy holds PII. Usernames and other online identifiers are PII according to GDPR Art 4/1 and legal practice as well. Photos people upload of themselves, people claiming to be Jews or from some country in comments are all PII. You have just said "oh but they are not" without backing up your claims. If nothing else, the fact that Reddit, the site which this is a clone of, holds PII should convince you if the relatively plain words of the law don't.

  • Lemmy processes data. According to GDPR Art 4/1 data processing does not involve sales of data, just "any operation or set of operations which is performed on personal data or on sets of personal data, whether or not by automated means, such as collection, recording, organisation, structuring, storage, adaptation or alteration, retrieval, consultation, use, disclosure by transmission, dissemination or otherwise making available, alignment or combination, restriction, erasure or destruction". Again, you have not found anything to back up your claim that "it actually doesn't and selling and processing is the same".

  • GDPR applies to nonprofits, even non-commercial entities, private individuals, government institutions as evidenced by fines. You claim an exception for "forum owners for free instances" without even trying to back it up, and are asking me to prove a negative, again without providing any evidence of your own.

So the real question is, let's say you're an admin of some instance that grows to some noticeable size. Would you trust your gut feeling of "I hate EU regulations, and they shouldn't apply to me either" before some random country you probably never heard of sends you a letter that you pay them some large amount of money? Or would you implement basic delete functionalities on your website and sleep easy?

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 4 points 8 months ago

Your next Xbox is going to have "military grade hardware built in".

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Nice moving the goalposts there. You said "not selling anything". I think police officers or the "Association for the prevention and study of crimes, abuses and negligence in information technology and advanced communications" don't sell stuff, they were fined nevertheless.

If I put a link to for example this case where a small social media provider got fined for nothing more than not handling data well, you could move the goalposts even further.

Or you could look at the countless cases brought against private individuals where they of course are not selling things. Austria fined a guy under GDPR for having a dashcam!

So again, you made a claim that there is an exception under GDPR for "forum owners of foss". Let's see evidence for that claim.

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 2 points 8 months ago

And where did you read that? If anything, public usernames are easier to correlate to form identities.

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 1 points 8 months ago (4 children)

There are dozens of cases of fines issued to municipalities, and government offices that don't do business. France fined a parliamentary candidate. Italy has fined the Italian Archery Federation, an NGO. Germany fined a bunch of individual police officers and an employee of a Covid testing centre.

Please either start backing up your claim of some supposed nonprofit exception, or go sealioning somewhere else.

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

How is IBM authoritative on this subject? And even so, this article doesn't say that usernames are not PII, it even indirectly says it is indirect PII.

Here's another random company's page saying usernames are PII: https://www.keepersecurity.com/blog/2023/06/14/what-is-personally-identifiable-information-pii/

The GDPR says it clearly and explicitly that:

  • online identifiers such as usernames are PII
  • selling data or money transactions of any kind is not a requirement for the GDPR rules to apply
[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 2 points 8 months ago (6 children)

Anything that someone's identity can be even indirectly inferred is PII. The GDPR explicitly defines usernames as online identifiers as PII.

The whole "irrespective of whether a payment of the data subject is required" bit is so that it applies to free services like Lemmy as well. Lemmy provides me with a free service. It even monitors me through federation, since it scrapes my username and comments from other instances without my affirmative and explicit consent. Using a service, no matter its nature, is not consent as required by the GDPR.

There is an explicit cutout for services you offer yourself or your household members. The reason it is there is that free services like Lemmy absolutely do qualify.

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 53 points 8 months ago (5 children)
[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 2 points 8 months ago (4 children)

Usernames are not PII

What do you think an online identifier is then? And why would the GDPR only apply if there is money made? It specifically says in multiple places free services also count.

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 1 points 8 months ago (8 children)

Where does it say that?

view more: ‹ prev next ›