News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Dow Jones’ watchlist of 2.4M high-risk clients has leaked. Parent comment

Re:Dow Jones’ watchlist of 2.4M high-risk clients has leaked by munchbunny on Wednesday February 27, 2019 @05:53PM (#19267648)
It doesn't. Those numbers are upper limits. Just like with traffic tickets and other fines, the actual amount is left to judgement.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dow Jones’ watchlist of 2.4M high-risk clients has leaked by Mirioron on Wednesday February 27, 2019 @07:10PM (#19268037)
If this were true then why have upper limits at all? The only reason I can think of is to protect large corporations.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dow Jones’ watchlist of 2.4M high-risk clients has leaked by dragonwriter on Wednesday February 27, 2019 @08:24PM (#19268312)
> If this were true then why have upper limits at all?

Because while the rulemaker believes that there is a range of potentially reasonable judgments based on particular circumstances, they do not believe that range is unbounded.

> The only reason I can think of is to protect large corporations.

The fixed minimum upper limit of $20 million is actually probably to prevent (or limit the effect of) large corporations using smaller subsidiaries and fancy accounting for GDPR-risky activities, rather than the upper limit protecting large corps.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dow Jones’ watchlist of 2.4M high-risk clients has leaked by munchbunny on Wednesday February 27, 2019 @08:12PM (#19268275)
For two reasons:

1. To prevent cruel and unusual punishment.

2. To set expectations about the seriousness of the infraction in the eyes of the law.

I am not a lawyer or a legal scholar, so I'm sure there are more reasons.

[ Parent | on HN ]