3 ms·

> this page is a great example of the UI ramifications of GDPR. Not having an option to reject that is as convenient as the one to accept is not compliant with

> this page is a great example of the UI ramifications of GDPR. Not having an option to reject that is as convenient as the one to accept is not compliant with GDPR.

rjsw 1y ago
You have the option of closing the window/tab, seems easy enough to me.
- yjftsjthsd-h 1y ago
  I am not a lawyer, but I am given to understand that the GDPR does not consider that "option" sufficient.
  - rjsw 1y ago
    The linked site provides the same choice that other publications do, my guess is that they have all checked this with lawyers.
    - snackbroken 1y ago
      Guidance from the regulators has been abundantly clear on this point. You'll notice all the big players have a "reject all" button because they would get fined otherwise. We're well past the point where anyone can make a reasonable excuse of ignorance, making it onerous to opt out is simply banking on lax enforcement. I, for one, think it's time to start busting some proverbial kneecaps if we ever want publishers to take the matter seriously. The other alternative is to outlaw the collection of personal information without a legitimate purpose (consent or no) _and then_ come down hard on violators. The industry has had ample time to regulate itself and has chosen profit over ethics at every opportunity.
      - rjsw 1y ago
        The linked site states that it does not collect personal information until you click on the "agree" button, in what way is that non-compliant with the GDPR?
        snackbroken 1y ago
        Like I said upthread, > Not having an option to reject that is as convenient as the one to accept is not compliant with GDPR. The law, guidance provided by regulators, and court rulings are all quite clear on this: Consent must be freely given, the consent form must not be coercive in any way. This includes (but is not limited to) making rejecting more difficult than accepting, degrading the quality of service for those who reject, gating the service behind accepting, or requiring payment from those who reject. Collecting personal information without prior consent would obviously also be a (worse) violation of the law.
        rjsw 1y ago
        In this case, rejecting is easier than accepting, just don't click on anything.
        snackbroken 1y ago
        If you don't click on anything then you are gated from the service. The service provider may not impose obstacles to using the service without providing consent that are not present when providing consent.
        rjsw 1y ago
        The GDPR just requires that if a service provider wants to process personal data then it has to follow certain rules. I don't think it prevents that service provider from restricting access to their service in some way, that is just outside the scope of this law.
        snackbroken 1y ago

> this page is a great example of the UI ramifications of GDPR. Not having an option to reject that is as convenient as the one to accept is not compliant with GDPR.

rjsw 1y ago

You have the option of closing the window/tab, seems easy enough to me.

yjftsjthsd-h 1y ago
I am not a lawyer, but I am given to understand that the GDPR does not consider that "option" sufficient.
- rjsw 1y ago
  The linked site provides the same choice that other publications do, my guess is that they have all checked this with lawyers.
  - snackbroken 1y ago
    Guidance from the regulators has been abundantly clear on this point. You'll notice all the big players have a "reject all" button because they would get fined otherwise. We're well past the point where anyone can make a reasonable excuse of ignorance, making it onerous to opt out is simply banking on lax enforcement. I, for one, think it's time to start busting some proverbial kneecaps if we ever want publishers to take the matter seriously. The other alternative is to outlaw the collection of personal information without a legitimate purpose (consent or no) _and then_ come down hard on violators. The industry has had ample time to regulate itself and has chosen profit over ethics at every opportunity.
    - rjsw 1y ago
      The linked site states that it does not collect personal information until you click on the "agree" button, in what way is that non-compliant with the GDPR?
      - snackbroken 1y ago
        Like I said upthread, > Not having an option to reject that is as convenient as the one to accept is not compliant with GDPR. The law, guidance provided by regulators, and court rulings are all quite clear on this: Consent must be freely given, the consent form must not be coercive in any way. This includes (but is not limited to) making rejecting more difficult than accepting, degrading the quality of service for those who reject, gating the service behind accepting, or requiring payment from those who reject. Collecting personal information without prior consent would obviously also be a (worse) violation of the law.
        rjsw 1y ago
        In this case, rejecting is easier than accepting, just don't click on anything.
        snackbroken 1y ago
        If you don't click on anything then you are gated from the service. The service provider may not impose obstacles to using the service without providing consent that are not present when providing consent.
        rjsw 1y ago
        The GDPR just requires that if a service provider wants to process personal data then it has to follow certain rules. I don't think it prevents that service provider from restricting access to their service in some way, that is just outside the scope of this law.
        snackbroken 1y ago