GDPR – ENFORCEMENT HOLDS THE KEY
11 laws are carefully crafted to meet some emergent need of society & are not inherently good or bad. The nature of implementation decides whether the cherished goals of the statute has been met or not. The potential of misuse & vested interest’s capability to either evade or taking the law on a tangent, finally entails its success or leaved it in disrepute. History will decide GDPR on this touchstone.
Hectic preparations by IT companies of late gives us a feeling that lots has been done. eMails have been flying all around, hitting the customer for giving consent or updating him of all the efforts made. Whether this flurry means in concrete terms will take some time to fathom out. On the very first day of GDPR’s implementation, Facebook & Google are hit with $8.8 billion in law suits, filed by Austrian Privacy activist Max Schrems, a critic of such data collection practices.
Schrems is of the opinion that the new policies & products making them GDPR compliant don’t go far enough. Check box trick to access services forces users into an all or nothing choice. violates particularised consent provision. He told Financial Times that existing consent provisions are clearly noncompliant. ”The totally know that it’s going to be a violation,” and ”they don’t even try to hide it.”
A new law is finally tested in a court of law. This being a techno-legal document, what is the nature of compliance the GDPR expects. If it’s in the nature of earlier compliances, half baked compliance with legalese, unconnected with reality would be filed as per the requirements. Is there is a system of a dynamic check at a real time level? Can GDPR gain access legally & check for itself. Technology is best suited to its owners & practitioners& can be used a double edged sword.
The journey of data protection has begun, snatching controls out of well established data behemoths will not be an easy task.
TRANSFORMATIONAL LAWS NEED EQUALLY TRANSFORMATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION.