GDPR

I understand that there is an emergency in the world to clean archives due to this GPDR law. I want to ask you if it is necessary.
I don't live in US but I didn't know where to write this question as is something that applies more or less the same all over the world, right? I selected New York having in mind the Liberty Statue that is for me as for many a high standard.
The GDPR law / set of rules is made based upon the right to be forgotten as they claim. It's good to know what rights we all have but we also must respect and fulfill the obligations and duties.
There are people who died because they wanted to run away from crisis territories, because their own territory leaders ordered so. It is unfair because those people weren't criminals. They only wanted to reach freedom.
If this law could be applied in that way is one thing. But to delete entire archives for the sake of forgetting?
Let me tell you that I grew up standing up to defend Michael Jackson in conversations with people around me of various aged. At the "beginning" it was easy to get to a common point. Then more difficult, it would require evidences such as putting them to listen the original version song and lyrics. At a certain point it was very hard for me, both emotionally and practically, because I was failing even when right and it would all have caused bad consequences on me as a child, even isolation. So I choosed not to talk about Michael's music anymore although I wouldn't write in English today if I didn't love his music and lyrics. I refused to buy any newspaper and if a "shocking news" was at the radio or at the TV, I would turn it off. And when one ocurred it would be repeated for many times a day on all the radio and TV channels. So I tried to avoid any media for much of the time. This until after a few days of me being sick, I saw on TV at night on a black screen Michael Jackson 1958-2009 and pictures of him from early ages until the last ones. I thought it was a typing mistake of someone or a very bad joke. But it wasn't. I didn't properly process the information until I was told by someone.
That kindman Michael Jackson begged to be left alone by the mass media. But they would keep on with the same lies when there are so many truths left untold about Michael. And they still do tell the lies even now. There are some Youtube channels that published "Unknown Facts about Michael Jackson" and most of the "facts" claimed-to-be, are lies from back in the times. Nowadays there are also a big amount of videos with disturbing figures and the Youtuber claiming that is a proof that Michael is alive. Personally I wish he was and in my heart will always be.
Letting these aside, supposedly people want to retire or state that they have worked or volunteer for x company. How they will have a proof of that?
How will detectives do their jobs? Based on what? For how much time will they keep what sort of data?
I wanted to tell you about the homework one has to do but I will resume in just few more lines.
One individual must remember many things in order to learn and avoid same mistakes or produce good things from what has. To be able to teach someone, one needs evidences, facts, data. People don't believe in God because science can't prove it without evidences, facts, data. So, for some people there is no meaning in completing the 10 Commands. Among which not to steal, or to kill, or to disrespect one's parents. There are people who respect them forced by the civil laws and others that don't but clear out evidences, including witnesses. I didn't hear about penalties for distespecting parents though.

I believe this GPDR set of rules is a way to escape for many and not at all to help justice. If I go on, I need a full website to debate everything that should be mentioned. Anyway it would be in vain.
I should be amazed of how laws are done today but I ain't. For example, printing In God We Trust is not enough evidence, fact, data of one's faith and anyway it doesn't fit all in US as I notice at famous people living in US. The latest breaking hit "God Is A Woman" is a screaming shame for the American nation of all times.

"Let us stand still, with fear and remember" said Michael the Archangel of Heavens, when Lucifer fell

The GPDR is a European Union law and applies in the EU. It does not apply world-wide and it does not apply in the US. You will need to find an EU forum for this discussion.

Actually, there isn't anything wrong with discussing it. Other than myself, there may not be many people familiar with it. I've actually had to deal with the GDPR heavily recently with regard to Fintech, Regtech, DLT and blockchain technologies. If I have time today, I'll take a quick look at the issue.

The GDPR - General Data Protection Regulation - has a number of really innovative policies and I enjoyed educating myself on how the EU hopes to stimulate all sorts of new thinking for what is claimed to be for the sake of progress. I see that you are addressing the reasons and rationale for the "Right to be Forgotten" and your objections. There are questions about application internationally which the EU's position takes is that it does apply across borders, especially to companies who have a presence there such as Google. In a short time Google has received millions of Right to be Forgotten requests.

But this law has created a great deal of controversy as to what information may be "inaccurate, inadequate, irrelevant, or excessive," and whether the public interest deems it necessary to be retained. On one hand, is it good for society to have someone who committed a crime when they were young to have a black mark upon them their entire life? There is a very strong argument that there should be a suppression of such a scarlet letter which brands someone as a youthful offender.

By the same token, this creates even more highly questionable problems. What if people running to be elected officials commit crimes for which it would require paid searches just to discover that which was public news? Should we allow people to whitewash some of the crimes they commit so easily or is there a substantial preventative mechanism which is created by the Internet? And if it has been published, what is there to stop other jurisdictions from having their own search engine which doesn't filter out all of these articles which may have been purged?

Right now the EU has fined Google a truly mind boggling sum of money. Is there really some substance behind the fine or is it just a government trying to kickstart its own regional innovation and financing it by fining companies whose headquarters lie elsewhere? That is a matter of opinion just like this is. I don't see the United States, with first Amendment freedom of speech protections, creating a right to be forgotten that is in any way as inclusive as the EU directive under the GDPR.

Mr Michael M. Wechsler, I really would like to thank you for personally answering my question. Before writing it I have read some articles about Copyright of yours. I know they don't apply everywhere the same but i had to start from somewhere. I read about your experience in big companies in specialism of law which is totally different and more on the ground point of view than of someone who only reads newspapers and watches tv.
I don't have any formal education in law, I am a mere observer who sees how UK is debating Brexit but already put in function this law. If UK leaves EU what will happen next? will UK have a back up to recover data?
Aside that, I read about OECD which is an organisation that includes some of the EU countries but also US and several other non European countries, about 50 in total. This organisation is still alive and stands for economical and financial aid. It began by helping countries to revive after Ist and IInd World Wars and other incidents that threaten lives or destroyed countries, some of which are now in much better shape due to the effects of OECD.
My question is now if a law issued by EU applies to / affects countries that are on the OECD map, which of the 2 comes first and on what bases? Is there somewhere better I should write about this?
And since when the GDPR applies? Not all of today EU countries were in the union since the beginning, many have entered after 2001. Will it take effect retroactively or even before EU?
Thank you once more for sharing your time on a Sunday.
Have a peaceful evening and a good new week.
Kindest regards

Thank you for your kind words. You ask some very complex questions. Others have a greater level of expertise but I have had some exposure in this area.

The countries who are members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) number about three dozen, with several clearly not located within the EU such as Israel, Mexico and New Zealand. It seems your question is about international "conflict of law" and conflict of interest (which includes also areas other than law). This is an issue which member countries are well aware and often taken into consideration and account. Accomplishing a harmony of laws and objectives is important. The largest and most potentially impacting groups will likely affect how the others act and react. The EU is the world's second largest economy and a trend setter. You can probably find more information about conflict of law in places such as in Google Scholar and even on the OECD website regarding Conflict of Interest Policies and Practices in Nine EU Member States.

Your question about the GDPR is interesting and perhaps what I explain may help in terms of understanding generally how laws and regulations may be implemented. Speaking generally and to make it simple, member countries in a union or group can agree to abide by the rules set by the group. A collection of "standards" can specify details such as the minimum requirements that a country must undertake, for example, to protect against money laundering and the financing of terrorism. Each member country then must implement a set of laws which complies with these standards within a certain period of time. A country may set its anti-money laundering (AML) law to be a little more stringent or stronger than the level set by the standard (perhaps it has a serious problem with money laundering) subject to any limitations that may impact how strong it can create an AML law too. This law then gets passed within that country and it becomes the country's law - and it is also in compliance with what has been agreed to by the union.

As to the EU, members of the EU agree to what the EU passes. As to the application of the GDPR, you can read about who is impacted and who it is intended to impact - which includes large companies outside of the EU who can impact upon people and entities that exist within the EU. The above doesn't explain or cover everything and is meant to provide a basic and simplified general understanding of how it can work. Here are some resources which can help, the first coming directly from the EU.

• Who does the data protection law apply to?
• Frequently Asked Questions about the incoming GDPR.
• Most member states won't be ready for GDPR
• Europe's New Privacy Law Will Change the Web, and More

Good afternoon or evening,

I don't feel like adding any more quedtions, neither like will a better answer come. I want to thank you once more for all answers above. I think it will be of good guidance for whoever needs a picture with what that law is, what aims and what effects follow if applied / not applied.
I will store the whole conversation, I'll try to see what of tasks that I do may be seen as an infringement of it and if abiding the law I will still be able to work what I do (probably yes but more like blinded and from own memory, which means that I have to keep in mind things that observe as a trend but not really state them).
Given this sci-fantastic reality of today I see myself in the situation to not store your or other people's details or whatever is refering and determining a person (?).
I am concerned following the articles in the links left in the last answer that they won't store details about political orientation. I know people who probably are cheering about that so it's good that someone is happy.

As a conclusion everyone will struggle anyway. Google, Facebook and other giants are made, created, born out of decades of learning and working and teaching and again. Maybe sone of them are living better than in the past, which I think is the ideal when we use the word entrepreneur. If one seeks a motivational speaker on Youtube, to keep on the same page, you will hear about people as Steve Jobs, Bill Gates etc. There are also some with presidents of USA or Dalai Lama but I don't want to get to that point. When the subject is around the word Entrepreneur you will be listening about Steve Jobs, Bill Gates and many others.
Basically regardless of how you look at the picture the Entrepreneurs are hitten unfairly by this law.
Secondly if the only people that are happy are those who cheer for not being forced to say what political views they hav or had this rings a Notre Dame cathedral bell.
I don't really believe this is for the sake of the consumers so they don't receive junk mails and emails. For this there is the trash bin, the spam button or maybe other limits some cheap companies should receive. Anyway I don't feel like cheering because mayve I won't receive junk mails and emails. I am rather worried if this law tells something very ugly about what EU stands for.

Not the least even if the so called EU (company, ONG, ecc) has a big amount of money, that money is coming from the member countries but do not belong to the countries or citizens. There are lots of people complaining about how EU destroyed something and not only in UK. Perhaps you should talk with Italian by birth people around Sicily if found alive. There are many more areas. EU might be seen as a power but powers can be good or not. Perhaps God should do something because it seems that no one can handle these things any more. Aliens seem hard to reach.

In God I trust too.