We've already had this discussion.

We've already seen non-adtech companies simply shut down EU access if they don't have enough revenue. That's probably not a good thing.

I support the GDPR, but complying with it is far from simple and the jurisprudence is not yet clear.

> That's probably not a good thing.

That's debatable. I imagine that many EU residents who are tired of having their data collected and sold by US companies consider this to be a very good thing.

It also means that an EU-based company can come a long and fill the void left by the former incumbent that doesn't want to play ball, which is likely good for the EU's economy.

Maybe it's not good for the US company, or for the US economy, but the EU (in theory) exists to further the interests of EU citizens.

As a California resident, if the same happens with the CCPA, I will not shed a single tear.

> That's debatable. I imagine that many EU residents who are tired of having their data collected and sold by US companies consider this to be a very good thing.

Until that game you like simply shuts down in the EU. Or until that website you visit simply blocks all EU access.

Just because someone can't prove they comply with the GDPR doesn't automatically mean they aren't in compliance.

You've added a bunch of friction to the little guys in order to punish Google, who won't really notice. Maybe you agree with that, maybe you don't. But you have already made that trade whether you like it or not.

"We've already seen non-adtech companies simply shut down EU access if they don't have enough revenue. That's probably not a good thing." - Why not? I suspect we can live happily without them.

> That's probably not a good thing.

Why not? Serious question.

Our EU employees could not file expense reports for months, because our expense management software (FROSCH or something) could not figure out GDPR compliance.

Soooo I kinda suspect you're talking with absolutely no first-hand experience.

I’ve now been at three large multinational companies who have gone through GDPR process. It’s not easy or simple for an established company, but it’s not impossible.

Additionally:

- before GDPR most EU countries already had similar laws (e.g. data protection laws in Sweden). Sometimes for decades

- GDPR gave two years to become compliant

All in all everyone had two to twenty years to become compliant. Those who didn’t? I personally wouldn’t give two shits about them.

Your expense management software? Well, you company chose it. It looks like your company are responsible for making sure that the software you use is GDPR compliant. Someone at your company and at FROSCH screwed up and now you blame GDPR for the screw-up.

This is a terrible line of reasoning. GDPR came AFTER the expense software, so blaming the company for not forwardly thinking about an non-existant regulation is ridiculous.

You had two years. Plenty of time to figure this out.

Also: is this your line of reasoning? It’s really weak. To take it to extremes: “we’re still using asbestos and lead pipes because the legislation was nonexistent when we started using them”.