If that worked I'd embrace GDPR. Problem with "any consumer can make a complaint which requires expensive follow-up" regimes is one doesn't have to do anything wrong to incur costs. Someone can mis-interpret something and make a complaint. Now you have to interface with a regulator, which tends to be risky, expensive and time consuming.
I'm not sure what's risky, expensive or time consuming about that.
Data regulator now asks you questions. You must respond. Hopefully they agree with you. But maybe not! Twenty-eight regulators appointed by different political groups are a complex system. You will need to gain expertise on them or hire someone with it.
All I’m saying is that time and money might be better used elsewhere. Particularly by someone just making side projects.
If you're not collecting data, then all of this is irrelevant. You just say "I'm not collecting data". There's no nuance here.
This is your interpretation. Many prominent lawyers disagree.
In any case, convincing a regulator that you are not, in fact, collecting data could be harrowing, distracting and expensive. The risk of incurring those costs probably isn’t a smart one to take for a hacker or very early-stage start-up.
Even if we assume a completely bizarre and pathologically incompetent regulator that somehow ends up zeroing in on some tiny website which exhibits no evidence of violation, the hobbyist might have to... delete their website?
Have you ever responded to a regulatory enquiry?
I'd like to point out that it's in the interest of a proeminent lawyer to tell you that their services are needed...
How do you prove you are not collecting data?
If your use default configs of Apache, or Nginx, your access.log is probably infringing GDPR. It’s impossible to prove you’re not collecting this without an extensive audit.
"replying to their email"
https://jacquesmattheij.com/so-your-start-up-receive-the-nig...