zlacker

>>grabeh+(OP)
There's certainly no need to panic. The article doesn't address that apart from mindless hysteria there are some very real issues with GDPR. It doesn't have to of course because as the title suggests it's more about dispelling panic than about giving concrete advice.

However, many real-life problems seemingly haven't even been considered by legislative bodies. In GDPR support forums questions like these have been routinely asked in recent months and there isn't always a clear, dependable answer:

- How will I be able to operate my small company website in the future in a legally compliant manner? Some companies even consider shutting down their websites completely and - of all things - only using a Facebook page in the future. Hence, ironically we might very will see GDPR actually benefitting companies like Facebook at the detriment of small companies that consequently won't have complete ownership of their content anymore.

- How exactly does a privacy policy have to be worded so I don't get sued on day 1?

- In which way will I still be able to store address data for contacting my existing customers?

- Will I still be able to use anti-spam and security plugins for my website? These tools might store users' IP addresses, which in some jurisdictions are considered personal data.

- Can I still load resources like Google Fonts from CDNs or do I now have to host those myself?

>>Bjoern+m6
I think this lack of implementation clarity is definitely a problem, as it is with CE marking; the legislation sets out "principles", but there's a lot of interpretation that has to be done between those and specific real details.