I hope you're right, but even if Pair has no presence in the UK, it may not help. See, for example, this, where a company with no presence in the UK was held subject to UK law. Given that there is at least one person in the EU who might reasonably be classified as a data controller, my instinct is to check with someone like the ICO. The EU is notorious for expanding its activities into areas where they aren't wanted. But the gods are the ones most likely to be targeted, and if they are unconcerned, that's the most important thing.

Regards,

John Davies

Update: The EU commissioner responsible for this has stated unequivocally that the location of the servers does not change responsibilities under proposed EU law. See this.

I really do not see how discrimination in an exam applies to a completely voluntary site like PM. I skimmed through most of that article, but I do not even see the overextending reach of the EU. I mean, if a local (UK) company contracts with a US company to provide testing and those tests discriminate against e.g. the blind, then that's a local (UK) issue. And that means the US company was doing business with a UK entity. It's apples to oranges.

I suppose one potential issue could be if the Perl Foundation receives money from people and/or organizations in Europe, but I think even that's a stretch.

Elda Taluta; Sarks Sark; Ark Arks