Second, the government would also remove the burdens of GDPR, creating in its place the most dynamic data protection regime in the world.
The EU’s Byzantine rules are preventing British tech companies from innovating and public services from sharing data to prevent crime. As any internet user can see, GDPR – with all its bureaucratic box-ticking – is clearly not working and needs to be replaced.
An independent report authored by a US government auditing agency has recommended that Congress develop internet data privacy legislation to enhance consumer protections, similar to the EU‘s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
The rational panic we see in the flurry of emails we‘ve all been getting, with subject lines of varying degrees of grief, and often with plaintive appeals to re-join previously vibrant subscriber communities now being split apart by regulatory pressure, reveals fundamental defects in the regulation‘s implementation. As does the blocking of EU users by terrified entities afraid that doing so is the only way to cope with the GDPR‘s troubling scope.
The GDPR‘s list of infirmities is long, ranging from its complexity and corresponding ambiguity, to some notably expensive requirements, to the lack of harmonization among crucial aspects of member states‘ local implementations, to the failure of many of these member states to produce these local regulations at any point usefully in advance of today, and to the GDPR‘s untested global reach. And they fairly raise the concern that the GDPR is poorly tailored to its overall policy purpose.
Zuckerberg told Reuters in a phone interview that Facebook already complies with many parts of the law ahead of its implementation in May. He said the company wanted to extend privacy guarantees worldwide in spirit, but would make exceptions, which he declined to describe.