User talk:Kate Bronstein: Difference between revisions
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Welcome == | == Welcome == | ||
Hello, | Hello, Kate Bronstein, and welcome to GDPRhub! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. --[[User:Wimh|Wimh]] ([[User talk:Wimh|talk]]) 13:48, 23 February 2020 (UTC) | ||
== Is Data Processing Agreement a silver bullet under GDPR? == | == Is Data Processing Agreement a silver bullet under GDPR? == |
Latest revision as of 12:16, 15 September 2021
Welcome
Hello, Kate Bronstein, and welcome to GDPRhub! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. --Wimh (talk) 13:48, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Is Data Processing Agreement a silver bullet under GDPR?
Hi Kate, I am also a volunteer on this website, and saw your contribution on Article 28 GDPR. While you might already know, I first want to attend you to the fact that this caused your text to be available under the CC-BY-NC-SA license. This means everybody will be allowed to copy and modify it based on the conditions of that license. If you are the copyright owner, that is perfectly fine to do. But the original source is not clear about who is the copyright owner. For example on wikipedia, you would have to prove that. I don't know about the policies on this site, but an admin might get into contact with you about this.
The article you posted is very long for a commentary about Article 28. If others are going to do the same, that page could become very huge. Would it be an idea to create a separate page with the article (Commentary - Is Data Processing Agreement a silver bullet under GDPR?), and on the Article 28 GDPR page just a summary with a link to that page? --User:Wimh|Wimh (User talk:Wimh|talk) 13:45, 23 February 2020 (UTC)