3 ms·

Dear ICO: This Is Why Web Developers Hate You

petercooper 14y ago
The ICO had already said they would only begin by looking at the biggest infringers and the grossest violations, so people who put serious effort into crippling their tuppenny-ha'penny sites before seeing how it played out wasted their time of their own choice. We know web agencies that spoke to hundreds of their clients, explained the painful but necessary changes, implemented and charged them who feel like setting fire to a flag with your logo on it right now. Oh aye? If billing clients for pointless work that could be blamed on a government agency isn't a cause for Web design agencies to celebrate, I don't know what is.
- EnderMB 14y ago
  A lot of developers believe the ICO only went soft because most of the UK governments own websites would not be compliant anywhere near the deadline. The cynic in me would not be surprised to see the ICO crack the whip once the government is safe.
- kaolinite 14y ago
  When the fine is up to £500K, can you really take the risk that they won't target you too? How do you define a "big infringer"? Someone who uses a lot of cookies? Someone who is making a lot of money? As for the web agencies point, I agree with you. The digital agency that I work for have made a killing from the new cookie law, providing "cookie audits" as well as work on client websites to bring them in line with the new law.
- oliveremberton 14y ago
  Not all companies get joy out of charging their customers to make their websites worse. Heaven forbid we're not all entirely motivated by money. And these websites are not all "tuppenny-ha'penny". Examples I'm personally familiar with include Universities and companies with revenue between £5-80m / year. Updating their sites is not trivial nor is it cheap. I despise the idea of a law we're told to obey, but expected to be cunning enough to avoid.
Isofarro 14y ago
ICO requirements got watered down by the UK Information Commissioner on Thursday last week: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/may/26/cookies-law-changed-implied-consent http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/may/26/cookies-law... Cached copy of the original article - since the site was down - deliberately 404ing the above posted link: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&biw=1152&bih=779&sclient=psy-ab&q=cache%3Ablog.silktide.com%2F2012%2F05%2Fdear-ico-this-is-why-web-developers-hate-you%2F&oq=cache%3Ablog.silktide.com%2F2012%2F05%2Fdear-ico-this-is-why-web-developers-hate-you%2F&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=hp.3...10320.14201.2.14872.23.18.5.0.0.1.118.772.16j1.17.0...0.1.qtnpDZb4Jgk&pbx=1 http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&biw=1...
- oliveremberton 14y ago
  Frustratingly it took us hours to get this back up. Remind me never to write a popular article before testing our infrastructure first!

The ICO had already said they would only begin by looking at the biggest infringers and the grossest violations, so people who put serious effort into crippling their tuppenny-ha'penny sites before seeing how it played out wasted their time of their own choice. We know web agencies that spoke to hundreds of their clients, explained the painful but necessary changes, implemented and charged them who feel like setting fire to a flag with your logo on it right now. Oh aye? If billing clients for pointless work that could be blamed on a government agency isn't a cause for Web design agencies to celebrate, I don't know what is.

EnderMB 14y ago
A lot of developers believe the ICO only went soft because most of the UK governments own websites would not be compliant anywhere near the deadline. The cynic in me would not be surprised to see the ICO crack the whip once the government is safe.
kaolinite 14y ago
When the fine is up to £500K, can you really take the risk that they won't target you too? How do you define a "big infringer"? Someone who uses a lot of cookies? Someone who is making a lot of money? As for the web agencies point, I agree with you. The digital agency that I work for have made a killing from the new cookie law, providing "cookie audits" as well as work on client websites to bring them in line with the new law.
oliveremberton 14y ago
Not all companies get joy out of charging their customers to make their websites worse. Heaven forbid we're not all entirely motivated by money. And these websites are not all "tuppenny-ha'penny". Examples I'm personally familiar with include Universities and companies with revenue between £5-80m / year. Updating their sites is not trivial nor is it cheap. I despise the idea of a law we're told to obey, but expected to be cunning enough to avoid.

Isofarro 14y ago

ICO requirements got watered down by the UK Information Commissioner on Thursday last week: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/may/26/cookies-law-changed-implied-consent http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/may/26/cookies-law... Cached copy of the original article - since the site was down - deliberately 404ing the above posted link: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&biw=1152&bih=779&sclient=psy-ab&q=cache%3Ablog.silktide.com%2F2012%2F05%2Fdear-ico-this-is-why-web-developers-hate-you%2F&oq=cache%3Ablog.silktide.com%2F2012%2F05%2Fdear-ico-this-is-why-web-developers-hate-you%2F&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=hp.3...10320.14201.2.14872.23.18.5.0.0.1.118.772.16j1.17.0...0.1.qtnpDZb4Jgk&pbx=1 http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&biw=1...

oliveremberton 14y ago
Frustratingly it took us hours to get this back up. Remind me never to write a popular article before testing our infrastructure first!