Providing the service is selling groceries, that doesn’t require a birth date.
So it’s not possible to sneak it under performance of contract. Only Legitimate Interest or Consent could be valid, and you can oppose/retract.
But good readng, please provide our findings, that will save me a reading 😅
What data controller is that?
Very few of them have a valid ground to process your birh date. Do they need it to provide you the service? No? Then they fail the data minimization requirement.
and refusing access right on the ground of the birth day, which they should not have in the first place, is the cherry on the cake.
Send them a letter to tell thel that you are ready to submit a complaint to your regulator (or the lead regulatior), but that you are ready to compromize to save hassle to everybody. A few thousands are always welcome.
But again, this is valid only if the controller have no ground to process birth date. If it provide adult stuff, or legal benefits, etc. it’s a different story.
Probable course of action is MSFT implementing a hotfix in the next 3-6 months, that will be nowhere near to address the topic.
Another 2 years of EDPS investigation.
Then MSFT will release another patch 3-6 months after that actually solves the issue.
But in the meantime, they would have implemented another mechanism to spy on users.
Rince and repeat.
Article 3 GDPR is straightforward, gdpr will apply.
The real question is how any kind of authority could enforce it ? Almost no chance that any law enforcement/regulator will bother a single-user instance purely on the ground of gdpr…
I’m not so sure about the GDPR status for the Fediverse, I don’t think there’s the law is prepared for “Jerry runs this for people, just for fun”. It’s very much “official organisation” or “money grabbing business” oriented. Someone should fund an actual lawyer to look into this and lay down the real requirements.
I’m working in the gdpr compiance field ;) Using a personnal device to monitor public space doesn’t fall under the household exception, this solution even pre-dates the GDPR (https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2014-12/cp140175en.pdf).
(the case-law is about camera fixed on a private house, but the logic easily translates in a private server grabbing public data).
but when legal compliance comes up, everybody just sticks their fingers in their ears and pretends not to hear you.
Just as you did ^^
No, Lemmy servers are not exempt from GDPR compliance. The household exemption (you are not subject to gdpr for private activities) only applies for purely personnal activities. As soon as a service is offered to someone else, the exemption is no more applicable.
That’s one of the drawback about open-source projects, they are designed to fulfill a need (persistent storage & decentralised communication for Lemmy), and no one give a f*ck about legalities.
Price is a thing, but having the option to chose is definitely good.
Now comes the real question: do you really trust the Zuck to implement a “do not share/sell anything” policy ? 'Cause yeah, if I’m paying, I’m expecting that none of my data is being sold/processed/transmitted to another company. Paying to just remove ads is … pointless.
It’s rather the other way around, Word is not 1 to 1 compatible with LibreOffice Writer when it comes to document editing. Writer is far better on that aspect.