3 ms·
Sure, there are allowances for technically essential cookies but in practice almost everybody is using third-party services like Google Analytics. For a physica
by oliwarner 11y ago
Sure, there are allowances for technically essential cookies but in practice almost everybody is using third-party services like Google Analytics. For a physical business with a brochure website, tracking how people use their site is more essential than any session cookie.
I'm not saying I necessarily disagree with the idea behind the law, rather that almost everybody uses cookies and making everybody announce that doesn't mean we're suddenly all informed.
An implicit /cookies/ or /cookies.html or even a domain-level TXT record would be just as informative, without clobbering user experience with a message that everybody is now blind to.
As others have said, copyright notices are as much about preventing infringement as they are anything else. Consider them similar to a "Thieves will be prosecuted" signs in shops.
- aethertron 11y agoWith regard to the law, at least the UK interpretation, 'essential cookies' aren't ones that are essential for the website-operator's business purposes. The term is restricted to cookies that are essential for what the visitor has requested. source: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-pecr/cookies-and-similar-technologies/ https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-pecr/cookies-a...
- oliwarner 11y agoThat's my point. Things that are so commonplace should be implicit.
- aethertron 11y agoI guess the legislators didn't think the general public was informed enough about cookies for them to meaningfully, implicitly consent. I don't think many people read the already mandatory privacy policies, so I'd have to agree. That the use of, say, 3rd party analytics cookies is so commonplace seems neither here nor there. (For the record: I would prefer a technological, rather than legislative solution here.)