It does seem a bit far fetched now. Private companies, which decide to store personal data on a permissioned blockchain, can actually alter the blockchain by forking it, as long as all the nodes agree. In case of a court order, there should be no problem in that.
Which is precisely why the usefullness of private, permissioned blockchains is questionable. In the end they lose all the worthwhile properties of a blockchain -- including, effectively, immutability -- leading the concept of blockchains ad absurdum.
The upcoming data directive of the EU is merely yet another reminder why it makes no sense to try cramming blockchains all over the place. The blockchain use cases that "got lost" due to the upcoming EU directive were likely never viable in the first place.
I doubt if any company would be storing personal data (in its raw form) on a permissionless blockchain.
Would make for an interesting legal case though. Say you're a company that offers the service to store your personal data on a public, permissionless blockchain by offering a simplified user interface for the likes of OP_RETURN. Who has the legal responsibility over the data? The consumer that made use of the service or the service provider?
If you put the hash of personal data on the blockchain, I think it still might be acceptable and not in violation of EU laws.
Exactly.
