> the original website is merely requesting the user to do so ... in a violation of GPDR, because user's informed consent was not received beforehand. > it's

> the original website is merely requesting the user to do so ... in a violation of GPDR, because user's informed consent was not received beforehand. > it's exactly what the court is there for I might have been more clear: it hardly matters what you or I could say — what does matter is only what the lawyers say. In this case, I assume that either A. the defendant's lawyers have brought this argument before the court, and the verdict still was what it was; or B. the defendant's lawyers have failed to bring this argument before the court. The courts are not there to discuss arguments made in HN comments.