hi sabri,
>> would those helpful folk kindly giving us legal opinions please tell
>> us your legal credentials?
fwiw, i did not mean to impugn anyone. the engineering advice on these
lists has some variance, though less variance on some lists than others.
and the lawyers i hear in real life,
- On May 12, 2020, at 12:51 PM, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote:
Hi Randy,
> would those helpful folk kindly giving us legal opinions please tell us
> your legal credentials?
Fair point. I dropped out of law school in my third year. I liked engineering
more. Strongly considering to go back
I have been told both things. That company email accounts wouldn't fall on its
scope (even if they contained the full name) and that such usage would be
improperly treating PII.
GDPR seems to mostly leave that part to Directive 2002/58/EC, which isn't
completely clear:
Article 13
Unsolicited
I’m not sure if this is true in all the cases, because a physical person can
also have PI resources and then a personal email in the database.
There is one more point, which I’m discussing with the Spanish DPA in the
constitutional court, and it is the classification between personal and
A good summary Sabri.
One of the points that has not been addressed (fully) is the fact that the
mailing went out to 'role accounts' which are normally company accounts (if
some used a personal email address for that, than this will have suddenly
become a business email address), so GDPR
Two quick points here:
The money collected by Data Protection Agency fines aren’t for the ones
claiming, but for the respective governments.
If the abuse country don’t have an agreement with the EU to collect that fine,
the EU can seize it later on, at any time, when there is a payment from
would those helpful folk kindly giving us legal opinions please tell us
your legal credentials? it would help us better calibrate your legal
assertions. thanks.
randy
- On May 12, 2020, at 12:32 PM, Töma Gavrichenkov
wrote:
> On Tue, May 12, 2020, 10:13 PM Sabri
>> First of all, there is the requirement for the non-EU company to
>> intentionally
>> provide goods or services to the EU. That can be found in article 3(2)a.
> Well, virtually that's
Peace,
On Tue, May 12, 2020, 10:13 PM Sabri
> First of all, there is the requirement for the non-EU company to
> *intentionally* provide goods or services to the EU. That can be found in
> article 3(2)a.
>
Well, virtually that's exactly our case: an employee of an Israeli company
promotes their
- On May 12, 2020, at 4:51 AM, Töma Gavrichenkov wrote:
Peace,
> Peace,
> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 1:29 PM Arash Naderpour
> wrote:
>> EU laws are for EU
> Perhaps sadly for some, but this is not how it works. EU laws protect
> EU citizens wherever they are, or the EU citizens' personal
Peace,
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 1:29 PM Arash Naderpour
wrote:
> EU laws are for EU
Perhaps sadly for some, but this is not how it works. EU laws protect
EU citizens wherever they are, or the EU citizens' personal and
sensitive data wherever it is accessed, processed, or stored.
--
Töma
Hi Jordi,
EU laws are for EU and not all countries care if they can do bussines with
EU, lots of assumption i guess.
Regards,
Arash
On Tue, 12 May 2020, 20:12 JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via anti-abuse-wg, <
anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> wrote:
> I don't think EU laws are useless towards non-EU countries
I don't think EU laws are useless towards non-EU countries that break them.
In the case of privacy, they will not be able to keep doing business with the
EU.
In a more understanding way, EU (or EU members) reach agreements with specific
countries so the sanctions can be applied as well,
- On May 7, 2020, at 2:26 AM, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote:
Hi,
(And to you Töma, Peace :))
> Töma Gavrichenkov wrote on 07/05/2020 10:03:
>> What does GDPR have to say about this?
>
> You mean the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations / PECR.
> Spamming is prohibited
> sorry, we have no policy to kick off dirty spammer from elections. I
> think it is time to do that. Let's do.
i doubt this is necessary
randy
On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 05:03:37PM +0300, Töma Gavrichenkov wrote:
> > sorry, we have no policy to kick off dirty spammer from elections.
> >
>
> I doubt that. Clearly, a person cannot qualify as a candidate right after
> a massive RIPE database ToU violation.
has anyone thought of just giving
Peace,
On Thu, May 7, 2020, 4:40 PM Max Tulyev wrote:
> sorry, we have no policy to kick off dirty spammer from elections.
>
I doubt that. Clearly, a person cannot qualify as a candidate right after
a massive RIPE database ToU violation.
--
Töma
>
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270
From: anti-abuse-wg on behalf of Max Tulyev
Sent: Thursday 7 May 2020 14:47
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Spamming LIR accounts
CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside
Hi,
On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 04:47:34PM +0300, Max Tulyev wrote:
> sorry, we have no policy to kick off dirty spammer from elections. I
> think it is time to do that. Let's do.
>
> Who can write a PDP document for this?
That's outside the PDP - it's a membership issue, so the relevant bits
are
Hi,
sorry, we have no policy to kick off dirty spammer from elections. I
think it is time to do that. Let's do.
Who can write a PDP document for this?
07.05.20 12:03, Töma Gavrichenkov пише:
Peace,
Okay, should I be the first to step in and say that spamming all the
LIR accounts with one's
Hej,
Den 2020-05-07 kl. 12:52, skrev Töma Gavrichenkov:
> and thus one candidate has just obtained unfair advantage,
> for which there should be consequences).
I doubt this actually qualifies as *advantage*. I'm optimistic that the
consequences will come with the election results.
I'm afraid
. 20036270
From: Töma Gavrichenkov
Sent: Thursday 7 May 2020 11:52
To: Brian Nisbet
Cc: Nick Hilliard; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Spamming LIR accounts
CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do
not click on lin
Peace,
On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 12:51 PM Brian Nisbet wrote:
> Should anyone believe they have been spammed by
> someone who they believe has harvested contact
> details from the DB, then they should contact
> ab...@ripe.net to report it.
No.
I mean, yes, but I also think it is necessary to
-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Spamming LIR accounts
CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and
know the content is safe.
Töma Gavrichenkov wrote on 07/05/2020 10:03
Hi,
On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 11:18:09AM +0200, Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg wrote:
> > What does GDPR have to say about this?
>
> Unfortunately GDPR is totally ok with mind-boggingly stupid "technical
> solutions" as long as they don't contain PII ;-)
>
> Sorry, I'll stop now
GDPR is not ok
Töma Gavrichenkov wrote on 07/05/2020 10:03:
What does GDPR have to say about this?
You mean the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations / PECR.
Spamming is prohibited under article 13.
National transcriptions of this legislation have implemented this as a
civil offence in some EU
Hi Töma
> What does GDPR have to say about this?
Unfortunately GDPR is totally ok with mind-boggingly stupid "technical
solutions" as long as they don't contain PII ;-)
Sorry, I'll stop now
Cheers
Serge
--
Dr. Serge Droz
Chair of the FIRST Board of Directors
https://www.first.org
Peace,
Okay, should I be the first to step in and say that spamming all the
LIR accounts with one's mind-boggingly stupid "technical solutions"
that have no, 0, zero chances to be implemented on the Internet is
completely irresponsible and grossly unacceptable behaviour?
What does GDPR have to
28 matches
Mail list logo
