5 ms·

I would define this as: if a site deliberately makes it any easier to "opt-in" than not, then a user giving up and just clicking the opt-in does not constitute

by rlpb 7y ago

I would define this as: if a site deliberately makes it any easier to "opt-in" than not, then a user giving up and just clicking the opt-in does not constitute freely giving consent, and any data gathered that way is not in compliance.

Vinnl 7y ago
And I feel even that is giving publishers some leeway. Even if a button is theoretically as easy to hit as another button, if it's just a bit of underlined text vs a button with a solid and bright background, they'll still get most of their users "consenting". (I'm wondering if they're teaching me to hit the de-emphasised button by default.)
input_sh 7y ago
It's already in there. Article 7, third paragraph: > It shall be as easy to withdraw as to give consent.
- marvin 7y ago
  Imagine seeing some 10 million euro fines over that. Would be glorious.
  - solarkraft 7y ago
    Would be. But I'm not aware of much actual GDPR enforcement ... :(
    - Gwypaas 7y ago
      It is starting to come, still mostly big players though https://www.enforcementtracker.com/ https://www.enforcementtracker.com/
    - BurningFrog 7y ago
      Once you've made everyone a criminal, enforcement is always selective.
- fxtentacle 7y ago
  I believe withdraw is after the fact, while what we need here is an option to reject the consent in the first place.
  - tgsovlerkhgsel 7y ago
    If the rule was applied literally and strictly, that would be even better. Is consent given by agreeing to a huge banner that pops up anew every time you load the page? Fine, you can do that, but then you have to pop up a huge "withdraw consent" banner every time a user that gave consent visits your site. Which you probably don't want, so you can't do the obnoxious opt-in banner either. In practice, that would make any obnoxious way to ask for consent untenable, because you couldn't use it to annoy users into consenting (and staying in consenting state).

by rlpb 7y ago

Vinnl 7y ago

And I feel even that is giving publishers some leeway. Even if a button is theoretically as easy to hit as another button, if it's just a bit of underlined text vs a button with a solid and bright background, they'll still get most of their users "consenting". (I'm wondering if they're teaching me to hit the de-emphasised button by default.)

input_sh 7y ago

It's already in there. Article 7, third paragraph: > It shall be as easy to withdraw as to give consent.

marvin 7y ago
Imagine seeing some 10 million euro fines over that. Would be glorious.
- solarkraft 7y ago
  Would be. But I'm not aware of much actual GDPR enforcement ... :(
  - Gwypaas 7y ago
    It is starting to come, still mostly big players though https://www.enforcementtracker.com/ https://www.enforcementtracker.com/
  - BurningFrog 7y ago
    Once you've made everyone a criminal, enforcement is always selective.
fxtentacle 7y ago
I believe withdraw is after the fact, while what we need here is an option to reject the consent in the first place.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 7y ago
  If the rule was applied literally and strictly, that would be even better. Is consent given by agreeing to a huge banner that pops up anew every time you load the page? Fine, you can do that, but then you have to pop up a huge "withdraw consent" banner every time a user that gave consent visits your site. Which you probably don't want, so you can't do the obnoxious opt-in banner either. In practice, that would make any obnoxious way to ask for consent untenable, because you couldn't use it to annoy users into consenting (and staying in consenting state).