> The GDPR reads as if its authors had a different understanding. For example, the 'data minimisation' principle indicates that you should not be collecting per

> The GDPR reads as if its authors had a different understanding. For example, the 'data minimisation' principle indicates that you should not be collecting personal data unless doing so would prevent the desired activity Indeed. It could reasonably be assumed that this is the main reason why the paid version does not use any tracking. > There's also a question over whether the services are the same: a subscription appears to be materially different to one-shot access to an article, a question which is entirely overlooked in their analysis. Well, the service is being offered on a monthly basis alone. The customer may only desire a one-shot access, but that offer is simply not on the table. I may only be interested one-shot access to [some-Netflix-movie], but the smallest access unit Netflix is willing to sell me is a month. Same goes for certain gym memberships. etc. > The practical interpretation is that, if a user wishes to read 100 articles from 100 service providers all using this scheme, the cost of privacy is a significant detriment at €600. Accessing a 100 difference service providers is on the customer, though? Same example as above. Say the customer wants to watch just one movie on Netflix, Disney+, and 98 other providers, all charging $10/month. $1000 per month sounds a lot but that's entirely on the customer; they could also just spend only $10 and watch 100 movies on Netflix.