4 ms·

The cookie acceptance banner for this site is one of the most obnoxious that I’ve seen. Basically accept them or leave (no problem with this as it’s their site)

The cookie acceptance banner for this site is one of the most obnoxious that I’ve seen. Basically accept them or leave (no problem with this as it’s their site). Thing is, the website had already stored data in my browser when I checked after deciding to leave. What’s the point of the banner then?

hmottestad 7y ago
They list tracking cookies, eg google analytics equivalent, which makes their site in breach of GDPR. Users need to be able to have a real choice. That choice can’t be accept or leave. I hope they get a nice juicy fine.
- samb1729 7y ago
  Can you cite a source for the claim that "choice can’t be accept or leave"? I would be quite surprised to learn that GDPR forces sites to accommodate users in this manner.
  - benjiweber 7y ago
    Whether this applies for google analytics may depend how/why it's being used. But this does seem to be the view for advertising related tracking. https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/consent/what-is-valid-consent/ https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio... "People must be able to refuse consent without detriment," "The GDPR is clear that consent should not be bundled up as a condition of service unless it is necessary for that service:" ICO recently published some opinion on adtech https://ico.org.uk/media/about-the-ico/documents/2615156/adtech-real-time-bidding-report-201906.pdf https://ico.org.uk/media/about-the-ico/documents/2615156/adt... clarifies some things "due to the use of cookies to process this information, consent (to the GDPR standard) is still required under PECR at the initial point of processing." "cookies used for advertising purposes are not ‘strictly necessary' " The Article 29 working party guidance expresses similar things https://iapp.org/media/pdf/resource_center/20180416_Article29WPGuidelinesonConsent_publishpdf.pdf https://iapp.org/media/pdf/resource_center/20180416_Article2... "If consent is bundled up as a non-negotiable part of terms and conditions it is presumed not to have been freely given. "
    - londons_explore 7y ago
      "let us store cookies, pay us $10 to compensate us for lost and revenue, or leave" would still be allowed though?
      - benjiweber 7y ago
        Not necessarily. From the Article 29 working party guidance linked above. ". If the customer’s refusal to consent to this processing purpose would lead to the denial of banking services, closure of the bank account, or, depending on the case, an increase of the fee, consent cannot be freely given."
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]

hmottestad 7y ago

They list tracking cookies, eg google analytics equivalent, which makes their site in breach of GDPR. Users need to be able to have a real choice. That choice can’t be accept or leave. I hope they get a nice juicy fine.

samb1729 7y ago
Can you cite a source for the claim that "choice can’t be accept or leave"? I would be quite surprised to learn that GDPR forces sites to accommodate users in this manner.
- benjiweber 7y ago
  Whether this applies for google analytics may depend how/why it's being used. But this does seem to be the view for advertising related tracking. https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/consent/what-is-valid-consent/ https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio... "People must be able to refuse consent without detriment," "The GDPR is clear that consent should not be bundled up as a condition of service unless it is necessary for that service:" ICO recently published some opinion on adtech https://ico.org.uk/media/about-the-ico/documents/2615156/adtech-real-time-bidding-report-201906.pdf https://ico.org.uk/media/about-the-ico/documents/2615156/adt... clarifies some things "due to the use of cookies to process this information, consent (to the GDPR standard) is still required under PECR at the initial point of processing." "cookies used for advertising purposes are not ‘strictly necessary' " The Article 29 working party guidance expresses similar things https://iapp.org/media/pdf/resource_center/20180416_Article29WPGuidelinesonConsent_publishpdf.pdf https://iapp.org/media/pdf/resource_center/20180416_Article2... "If consent is bundled up as a non-negotiable part of terms and conditions it is presumed not to have been freely given. "
  - londons_explore 7y ago
    "let us store cookies, pay us $10 to compensate us for lost and revenue, or leave" would still be allowed though?
    - benjiweber 7y ago
      Not necessarily. From the Article 29 working party guidance linked above. ". If the customer’s refusal to consent to this processing purpose would lead to the denial of banking services, closure of the bank account, or, depending on the case, an increase of the fee, consent cannot be freely given."
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]