Ultimately compliance is defined by precedent, and by example. Both are being established here, in this case. So, good point about the actual act their being ch

Ultimately compliance is defined by precedent, and by example. Both are being established here, in this case. So, good point about the actual act their being charged under. Either way though, the concept of consent is similar in the GDPR. It is notable that GDPR makes more effort to define consent better, and implicitly deals with the fact that choice and such are important. How that translates into enforcement/compliance... I guess we'll see. I think we both agree that none of these recent legislative changes (also in the US and elsewhere) have given us much improvement on consent, so far. You just might be more optimistic than me on prospects. I think the problem is a hard one, at least within our current normative frames. A regulator has very few nearby examples to draw on, for an enforceable model of consent. They need a binary, but a broader concept of consent isn't very amenable to that.