3 ms·
Does it set a precedent that I can send a header "do-not-show-ads" and they can't send me ads?
by agilob 3y ago
Does it set a precedent that I can send a header "do-not-show-ads" and they can't send me ads?
- dist-epoch 3y agoTracking is considered a negative action, so there are stronger protections around that. It's not a crime to put an advertising truck outside a house, but it can be to put a (private company) surveillance truck.
- Rygian 3y agoI've been having the same thoughts. Pragmatically, the main roadblock is that the DNSA flag would need to go through some legitimate standardization process. It would be really fun* if the headers of an HTTP request were to be considered part of a legally binding agreement between client and server. *In a "mentally deranged fun" sense, of course.
- JanSt 3y agoNo, ads are okay in terms of GDPR. The tracking requires consent.
- agilob 3y agoAds are highly regulated in the EU and individually in member countries. Eg. in Poland it's illegal to show ads using TV shows for children, the ads before and after a show have to be child safe, eg. no medications. Yet same rules don't apply to YouTube or Facebook. Why wouldn't I indicate using a header that this device is used by a child and ads must be appropriate?
- gpderetta 3y agoStandardizing a "child-safe-content-only" flag would be definitely appropriate.
- hnbad 3y agoI remember that this was trying to be a thing in the mid-2000s (via COPPA) in order to help better age restrict adult content. Sites would use metadata to signal the apropriate age limit for their content and web filters could use this to deny access. I don't think that ever went anywhere.
- gpderetta 3y agoThere is no right not to be shown ads. Also you would need your header to be specified in some standard (informal or otherwise).