nanog mailing list archives
Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news
From: "K. Scott Helms" <kscotthelms () gmail com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:01:42 -0400
Yeah, that's not accurate. US organizations sue EU organizations in US courts (and vice versus) on a regular basis but have EU courts collect the damages. Congress can carve out an exemption, but I haven't heard of an effort in that direction getting started yet. In the absence of a legislative exemption the EU regulators can absolutely sue a US entity in US civil courts and get a ruling based on EU laws and regulations. Here's a completely unrelated civil case, on libel, that references the bilateral enforcement and how NY state carved out an exemption. https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/03/21/394273902/on-libel-and-the-law-u-s-and-u-k-go-separate-ways Scott Helms -------------------------------- http://twitter.com/kscotthelms -------------------------------- On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 11:56 AM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:
Not really. If you don’t offer services to EU persons, then you are right. However, due to treaties signed by the US and other countries, many places outside the EU are subject to GDPR overreach. OwenOn May 23, 2018, at 05:36, Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net> wrote: If you don't have operations in the EU, you can not so politely tell theEU to piss off.----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matthew Kaufman" <matthew () matthew at> To: "Fletcher Kittredge" <fkittred () gwi net> Cc: "NANOG list" <nanog () nanog org> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2018 8:07:15 PM Subject: Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest newsOn Mon, May 21, 2018 at 1:56 PM Fletcher Kittredge <fkittred () gwi net>wrote:What about my right to not have this crap on NANOG?What about the likely truth that if anyone from Europe mails the list,thenevery mail server operator with subscribers to the list must follow the GDPR Article 14 notification requirements, as the few exceptions appeartonot apply (unless you’re just running an archive). Matthew
Current thread:
- Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news, (continued)
- Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news niels=nanog (May 27)
- Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news Michel 'ic' Luczak (May 27)
- Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news Sander Steffann (May 27)
- Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news Dan Hollis (May 23)
- Message not available
- Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news John Levine (May 23)
- Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news jeff murphy (May 24)
- Re: GDPR outside Europe, was Whois vs GDPR, latest news John Levine (May 24)
- Re: GDPR outside Europe, was Whois vs GDPR, latest news K. Scott Helms (May 25)
- Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news bzs (May 23)
- Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news Owen DeLong (May 23)
- Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news K. Scott Helms (May 23)
- Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news Mark Rousell (May 21)
- Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news Joly MacFie (May 21)
- Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news Constantine A. Murenin (May 17)
- Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news Rob Evans (May 17)
- Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news Brian Kantor (May 17)
- Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news Niels Bakker (May 17)
- Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news Stephen Satchell (May 17)
- Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news Badiei, Farzaneh (May 21)
- Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news Dan Hollis (May 23)