3 ms·
Because they're not failing due to misunderstanding the law, they're getting sued because their 'compliance' to the GDPR is against the spirit of it, and in mos
by platelminto 8y ago
Because they're not failing due to misunderstanding the law, they're getting sued because their 'compliance' to the GDPR is against the spirit of it, and in most cases is actually in direct violation of multiple clauses. They're trying to follow the letter of the law and remain in the grey areas - if a 'small site run by a few regular folks' isn't doing anything shady, and isn't being basically negligent with their users data, they will be fine.
- makomk 8y agoI'm not sure about Facebook due to not using it, but Google's actually one of the less shady companies in this area. At least they do let you opt out of tracking-based advertising. Other sites don't. For instance, I just tried to view a Forbes article and it redirected to an interstitial which defaulted to letting them track me for advertising purposes, then when I changed the setting to only allow essential cookies it made me wait for several minutes with only a Cancel button, then finally redirected every page on the site to a message saying "You have arrived at this page because you have chosen not to consent to the use of cookies that help us provide a great experience (and great content) to you free of charge" and not allowing me to do anything but change my settings back. Journalists are just a lot less willing to criticise the state of the free press than they are to attack companies like Google and Facebook that eat into their collective profits.