← Back to context

Comment by ceejayoz

7 days ago

The EU doesn’t play around in this realm.

1.2 billion fine for an earlier incident: https://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/news/2023/12-billion-euro-fi...

1.2B is less than 1% of Meta's revenue in FY2024. Maximum fines for infractions like these should exist on a sliding scale, as some percentage of prior revenue.

  • Probably best indexed to profit rather than revenue. 10% of revenue would be a one quarter’s profit for meta, but more than a year’s profit for Amazon and about 9 years of profit for Otto. Higher margins / profits should mean higher fines.

  • Something that you can sensibly express as a fraction of the revenue of Meta is significant though.

    It must be low enough that Meta never seriously considers to pull out of Europe.

    • > It must be low enough that Meta never seriously considers to pull out of Europe.

      Why? Threathening is one thing, actually leaving one of the largest markets is something different. Also, not much of value would be lost.

      > Something that you can sensibly express as a fraction of the revenue of Meta is significant though.

      Also, if the percentage is low, it just becomes the "cost of doing business" and not a fine that would actually make them rethink and not do stuff like that again.

    • Why do you think Zuck became a wannabe fascho out of nowhere? DMA and GDPR fines will hurt Meta a lot when they are due. Zuck is trying to leverage Trump and the war to nullify the fines.

  • They actually do; max GDPR penalty is 4% global revenue, say.

    Of course the concern would be that even at that rate some companies might see it as a cost of doing business.