> Regulators are the ones accepting the malicious compliance as compliance! Yeah, I had to read the first version of "the cookie law". The intend was super cle

> Regulators are the ones accepting the malicious compliance as compliance! Yeah, I had to read the first version of "the cookie law". The intend was super clear, at least in the Danish version, it was pretty easy to implement and wouldn't really bother anyone... Then came the marketing/SEO/retargting assholes who had a nice thing going tracking the everlasting crap out of everyone and they did NOT want things to change. Some of these people then came up with the "hosted cookie banner" and things went to hell from there. You are absolutely right that this should never in a million years be viewed as compliance. It mostly didn't, and still doesn't work. What should have happened is that the law should have been amended to prevent outsourcing responsibility.