8 ms·
My recollection is that at least some country's regulators have said that if you offer option A you must also offer option A': continue for free without trackin
by tzs 3y ago
My recollection is that at least some country's regulators have said that if you offer option A you must also offer option A': continue for free without tracking and profiling.
Their reasoning was that GDPR says that consent must be freely given. If the site provides more service if you consent than the consent is not freely given according to those regulators.
(It seemed kind of goofy to me. In every other context I can think of consenting to something that you do not like in exchange for getting something that you want is usually considered to be freely given consent unless that something you want is something that is necessary).
- Semaphor 3y agoAs I posted in another comment, German regulators apparently okayed this.
- xigoi 3y agoIf what you're describing is free consent, then what does non-free consent look like?
- Semaphor 3y agoThe current solution at facebook: You will be tracked.
- xigoi 3y agoThat's not non-free consent, that's not consent at all.
- Semaphor 3y agoYou can not use it. That’s the logic here, that for free consent, a workable alternative has to exist, and some regulators say that "paying" is one, while "not using the biggest social network in the western world" is not.
- shaftway 3y ago"Look at these ads or I will hit you with a hammer"