Woah we got all that data for just $25m? Bargain.
toiletobserver@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Should have been 25% of profits. Percentage based systems work.
DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
EatMyDick@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Lolololol 25% of profits for keeping on to recordings for too long? You people are insane. You just hate Amazon and want to stick it to them.
The irony is none of these lemmy instances are run by companies with registrations and can do whatever the fuck they want when your data yet everyone is a okay cause pinky promise I hate Reddit too! 🤦♂️
gian@lemmy.grys.it 1 year ago
A penalty should be something you want to avoid. A 25 million (occasional) fine for Amazon is like asking me to pay a .25 (occasional) fine for, say, no parking. It has no deterrence.
On the other hand, a percentual on the profits is a lot more deterrent, expecially for a company. Maybe 25% is too much, I agree, but let’s say a 2-5% of the profits is not that bad.
Note that a fine that is a percentual of your profits (or income) is far more balanced because it hurts the small and the big company the same way.
tony@lemmy.hoyle.me.uk 1 year ago
25% of profits for wilfully breaching privacy law… that’s actually quite low given what creative accounting can do for profits.
GDPR maximum fine is 4% of global turnover. Luckily for amazon it’s capped otherwise they’d be on the hook for billions.
EatMyDick@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Christ, that type of penalty has no bearing of actual damages. They kept the data longer than another party thought was needed. The actual damage was minimal. They have a robust set of controls and are one of the better tech companies to work with in regards to child protection. A whole hell of a lot more than these lemmy instances doing literally nothing to protect childrens data.
Whirlybird@aussie.zone 1 year ago
25% of revenue, not profits. If it was profits then the fine would likely be $0 due to creative accounting.