> This makes it impossible to use any components hosted by third parties without getting consent by the users. And for components hosted in a different country

> This makes it impossible to use any components hosted by third parties without getting consent by the users. And for components hosted in a different country than the visitor, even consent might not make using those external components legal. This is based on some very faulty knowledge of GDPR and the law. You are allowed to process data without the consent of the user for various things. This would include their IP address. You're allowed to have third party data processors process data on your behalf without user consent for various things. The Google Font ruling was partially due to who Google is. Google data mines, they're famous for it. So giving Google data they can use to map to your internet persona which may even be linked to your name directly is obviously something many people want to do only when they consent. The fact Google Fonts could be self hosted was another part of the reason for the ruling. That is, sharing the information wasn't required to be able to perform what the actions they wanted to perform, use a font. Data processing done by US companies is not currently GDPR compliant. However, no one is enforcing that. It would be a complete mess and there are far too many. In reality, everyone is ignoring it waiting for the new laws to be created to make it legal. The reason the US companies are an issue is a US court can issue a judgement to a US company and they are forced to comply no matter where the data is. > This is bad and not in line with reality. The IP can only be turned into personal information via cooperation of the users internet provider. This is also not true. If you visit a website that sells B2B accounting software and your IP is identifiable to a company. You could phone up the company and ask to talk to the person who is responsible for finance. If there is only one person, boom easily identifed. There are also various other ways. > So in Europe, the whole internet is made illegal based on a wrong assumption. Really, your comment is wrong based on multiple wrong assumptions.