Especially when you consider that it was stopped 3 years ago.

Except it didn’t. My daughter in the US created an account and it didn’t require any family pairing or verification that the adult paired with her was her parent

These are EU laws that only pertain to the EU. US has different laws.

I guess TikTok has different software policies per country

Your honour, clearly you cannot convict my client since the crime was committed years ago.

/s

You don't work for TikTok by amy chance?

I definitely don't work for TikTok. I don't know the details. But the fine is way too much regardless.

you know how it's not too much? they can afford it.

What a deranged idea, you're implying it's okay to bankrupt a company just for a minor privacy violation.

i think it's deranged that you feel privacy violations are minor in any form. also, this isn't a first offense

Data privacy violations are certainly minor. Until we get that through, our companies are going to suffer. We have far, far, far greater problems in the world than privacy issues of usually meaningless data.

Data privacy is a paramount concern in free democracies. But of course you don't get that.

Oh, I think it is totally ok to bankrupt a company for not following the law.

For any violation at all? If one single McDonalds employee in Dublin breaks the health code, you think all of McDonalds should go bankrupt?

I assume you also support the death penalty for J walking?

If it is a single McD employee, fine said restaurant (which is already the case, but you onow that don't you?). If it is a general issue with a franchise chain (McD is running a franchise, so the company to go bankrupt is most likely a franchise in your example), fine them. And yes, that can lead to bankruptcy, as happened a couple of years ago with a Burger King franchise chain in Munich.

If McD is knowlingly selling carcinogenic burgers world wide and reguses to stop, sure, bankcrupt McD.

I don't know how this could possibly be down-voted, it's spot on.

A privacy violation is never minor.

Consider that GDPR has been in effect since 2016, with a grace period until 2018 before the EU started to hand out fines.

It's been 7 years that every company operating in the EU knows about these rules, 3 years ago it was already 4 years into effect. There's no excuse, they broke the law, pay the fine.

It's pretty normal for these things to take a while; most fines (and for that matter most prosecutions) would related to historic offences, not ongoing ones.

That's not the point of the justice system. Justice is not about retribution, justice within criminal contexts is about punishments within the realm of what is good. Punishing someone for past behavior that serves not future purpose is retribution. The justice system needs to be changed if it's about tick for tack.

For example, we don't need to give somebody a life-long sentence for a crime that they're obviously and apparently not going to repeat again. We have to take into consideration relative changes.

An obvious example here is the ongoing case with Danny Masterson, a crime that was committed 20 years. He's now a family man and a father. It makes no sense to give him 30 year in prison. That is just cruel. Our justice system has failed, not only him, but also his family - like his daughter, who will now grow up without a father. What good does that do???

We have to become forgiving and tolerant as a society, things are becoming desperate.

You do know that corporations are not people? Right?

Obviously. That doesn't mean its good to drive our companies into the dirt, just because they're not people. People depend on them. People work for these companies. Their significance is perhaps far greater than actually ruining just the lives of one person.

Our companies? TikTok is Chinese... That being said, I do not consider jobs or companies benefits a valid argument when it comes to anti trust and regulations.

But you sure know capitalism, and corporations, abuse the goodwill of hoverents, local and national, and communities. You just want to be ultra edgy for some reason.

> our companies

Oh ho ho ho. Now your comments ITT suddenly make sense.

That's monopoly money. Put the ones in charge behind the bars, that's something that might make them think twice before breaking the law again

Or people will think twice about opening companies in your jurisdiction. There's a reason pretty much all the new fortune 500 companies created in the last few decades are not from the EU.

Why exactly is it that the quality of a society is measured by how many big companies they have? Does Philip Morris contribute to society or detract from it? Can we dispense with the notion that big companies inherently improve society? Letting go of this does not imply you are a communist, regardless of how many seem to think so. You can believe that society achieves better outcomes by having tighter rules of play, rather than an anything goes mentality. Yes it makes it harder to create megacorps with billions upon billions of revenue. And so what?