Data privacy : Copy that

數據隱私：照貓畫虎

Putting the personal into data
將個人隱私化為數據

America need not adopt the GDPR wholesale. The legislation is far from perfect. At nearly100 articles long, it is too complex and tries to achieve too many things. The compliance costs for smaller firms, in particular, look burdensome. In addition, parts of the GDPR are out of step with America’s constitutional guarantee of free speech: a “right to be forgotten” of the kind that the new law enshrines will not fly.

美國并不需要全盤照搬 GDPR 的規(guī)定。GDPR 的立法者們并沒有做到盡善盡美。這部法律有將近 100 個條文，為了實現(xiàn)諸多目標使得法律本身過于復雜。尤其是對于小公司而言，遵從法律的成本顯得過于沉重。另外，GDPR 的某些部分和美國憲法原則中的言論自由并不一致，比如在法律中規(guī)定的”被遺忘權“就并不符合美國實際。

But these are arguments for using the GDPR as a template, not for ignoring the issue of data protection. If America continues on today’s path, it will fail to protect the privacy of its citizens and long-term health of its firms. America’s data economy has thrived so far with hardly any rules. That era is over.

但是這種爭論也僅僅是基于在以 GDPR 作為模板時所可能產生的問題，并非是關于是否應當對數據進行保護這一問題本身。在當今時代如果美國仍然一意孤行的話，那么就無法保證其公民的隱私權以及其國內公司的長期健康發(fā)展。美國的數據經濟因沒有法律監(jiān)管而獲得了重大發(fā)展。但這樣的時代已經過去了。