"consumer" is the language in the CCPA (which had its origins in a ballot initiative); most general privacy laws in the states are designed as consumer protection laws rather than civil rights like in the EU.
You do realize that (i) "zones" are just restaurants / cafes / museums that have minimum age requirements and not some demarcated city blocks where children are banned and young adults party all day and (ii) this occurs semi-frequently in the west as well.
This is explicitly recognized in contract law: course of performance / dealing is a factor courts will consider in evaluating the nature of a deal. (Most contracts will try and carve it out).
This is incorrect. The GDPR requires affirmative consent before processing user information, hiding is not "affirmative." Additionally, there's been increasing litigation via wiretapping statutes (most notably in California where there's statutory minimums for damages) that pose additional legal risk for companies using analytic cookies w/o affirmative consent.
Yeah, my theory on this has always been that a lot of programming efficiency gains have been the ability to unambiguously define behavior, which mostly comes from drastically restricting the possible states and inputs a program can achieve.
The states and inputs that lawyers have to deal with tend to much more vague and imprecise (which is expected if you're dealing with human behavior and not text or some other encodeable input) and so have to rely on inherently ambiguous phrases like "reasonable" and "without undue delay."
I'm genuinely shocked at how "tort reform" (read: corporations trying to reduce liability as much as possible) propaganda has permeated the general consciousness.
- Liebeck initially only requested McDonald's cover the medical fees from going into shock and having 3rd degree burns over her lower body (including genitalia), which McDonald's refused and only offered $800.
- McDonald's had received hundreds of reports of the coffee scalding people.
- Liebeck didn't get the multi-million dollar payout because the judge reduced it 640k, trebled the compensatory damages, which is incredibly normal for punitives.
1. Even if they trust you, they might not be willing to extend that trust to non-technical staff (or even non-infra staff) and having a global policy is the easiest.
2. Even if they trust you, your employer's customers definitely don't, and a lot of big contracts will have security exhibits that explicitly require MFA if you're handling their data.
This is literally the same reasoning segregationists used during the Civil Rights Act lmfao. "Privately owned establishments" use public infrastructure and tax subsidies, why should people with disabilities be disproportionately and discriminatorily excluded from swaths of public life due to no fault of their own.
> If you lived in a secluded cave and completely independently wrote Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (unlikely, I know, but it's hypothetical), you'd be violating J.K. Rowling's copyright by selling it.
This is absolutely incorrect. Independent creation is a complete defense to copyright infringement. Funny enough, Learned Hand gives a near identical example to highlight the opposite conclusion ("if by some magic a man who had never known it were to compose anew Keats's Ode on a Grecian Urn, he would be an 'author,' and, if he copyrighted it, others might not copy that poem, though they might of course copy Keats's").
