When looking at an IP for an investigation, they don’t use GeoIP. They use “ask the ISP who had this IP at this time, oh, thanks for the full name, address, bank info, phone number”.
You sure about that? They have a legal obligation to keep this trace, and it sounds like it would easily qualify as a legitimate interest. We’re not talking about some third party logging a visitor’s IP, but an ISP, that have a requirement to keep this information.
The GDPR isn’t making all personal identification data inaccessible, they restrict how they can be stored and accessed. If there’s a legal requirement and/or a legitimate interest, they can be stored, and if the data exists and is requested by law enforcement, it’s likely that higher agreements will hold.
GDPR implies EU residence and USA law enforcement has no power in the EU. So they’d have to ask EU law enforcement, which will deny the request because of the fascist reasoning (Negative comments are both legal in the EU and US). GDPR protects the user where US law enforcement would try and get the data from the ISP directly, which is not allowed to share it without consent or a warrant by local law enforcement.
(Also, in the EU you can not sign your rights away. This means that even if you agree to a ToS where you allegedly give consent, it still isn’t allowed. The GDPR and local law supersede).
When looking at an IP for an investigation, they don’t use GeoIP. They use “ask the ISP who had this IP at this time, oh, thanks for the full name, address, bank info, phone number”.
Well my ISP won’t hand over that info as it would be a violation of GDPR not that this administration will have thought that one through.
You sure about that? They have a legal obligation to keep this trace, and it sounds like it would easily qualify as a legitimate interest. We’re not talking about some third party logging a visitor’s IP, but an ISP, that have a requirement to keep this information.
The GDPR isn’t making all personal identification data inaccessible, they restrict how they can be stored and accessed. If there’s a legal requirement and/or a legitimate interest, they can be stored, and if the data exists and is requested by law enforcement, it’s likely that higher agreements will hold.
US law enforcement has no jurisdiction outside of the US.
And there’s never been any kind of international cooperation between law enforcement ever, anywhere.
US law is not global law. There is no international cooperation allowing the US fascist police department to do whatever it is that they want.
GDPR implies EU residence and USA law enforcement has no power in the EU. So they’d have to ask EU law enforcement, which will deny the request because of the fascist reasoning (Negative comments are both legal in the EU and US). GDPR protects the user where US law enforcement would try and get the data from the ISP directly, which is not allowed to share it without consent or a warrant by local law enforcement.
(Also, in the EU you can not sign your rights away. This means that even if you agree to a ToS where you allegedly give consent, it still isn’t allowed. The GDPR and local law supersede).
They will certainly hand it over if a there is a warrant.
(I wonder how far you could daisy chain wifi routers and repeaters. At least make them work for it.)
A warrant from a US judge isn’t worth the paper it’s written on except in the US so no they wouldn’t hand it over