I don't think the situation is as simple as you make it out to be. Due to the geoblock, latimes.com clearly does not offer its services to people in the EU in the sense of Article 3.2(a) of the GDPR. Now, Article 3.2(b) states that the GDPR would still apply if they track your behavior while you are located in the EU. Since you are using a VPN it could be argued that, from the perspective of latimes.com, your behavior takes place in the US and not the EU and that therefore the GDPR does not apply.

How would you expect to impose any injunctions or damages on the LA Times for disregarding an EU law?

In other words, to what court will you take your case? A US court won't hold a US company to account for breaking a non-US law. A European court has no jurisdiction to impose any penalties on a non-European company.

Does the LA Times have EU offices? How are you tying the two together otherwise?

> A European court has no jurisdiction to impose any penalties on a non-European company.

In theory can’t an european court request the US gov. To hand over the CEO for illegal activities ?

Not that this case would go these lengths and I have not idea of any merit of OP’s point.

What illegal activities? Tracking users is not illegal in the US, nor is blocking access. You could make wearing purple illegal again and ask the US to extradite folks for it, but we wouldn’t do it so you wouldn’t bother asking.

Maybe they could, but I can’t imagine the US government could legally extradict. It would be absurd for the US to allow the EU (or the other way around, for that matter) to dictate what Americans or American companies can do in America (assuming the companies have no EU presence).

yeah - exactly that. Or just arrest them any time they visit, really.

We could ask Kim Dotcom for some advice ?

> If anyone from the LA Times is listening, even though I am accessing the website through our US VPN, I'm still fully protected by the GDPR.

Cite?