logoalt Hacker News

anakaineyesterday at 9:45 PM2 repliesview on HN

Because if, as the regulator, you fail to benchmark what they gained then your laws can be ignored and your fines paid as simply a cost of doing business.

Its why you find the Australian regulator for consumer affairs handing out $200m+ fines to telecommunications companies, for example.


Replies

Retricyesterday at 9:46 PM

By that logic regulators should lower fines if the action wasn’t profitable. Which creates an expensive legal fight around the net profits of some action were after guilt is determined.

Instead, it’s much better to scale fines based on the scale of the entity involved, which also results in huge fines, but it’s easier to measure revenue. Thus the fines are more broadly effective, and you can still escalate if they don’t stop.

show 4 replies
fc417fc802today at 12:44 AM

This entire issue is sidestepped by having graduated fines (which GDPR has). If they keep doing it the amount keeps going up until eventually they go out of business. It really limits the ability to take advantage of the system which hopefully makes it not worthwhile to bother doing.

show 1 reply