This law is not aimed at the average homebrew website or restaurant menu page - it's for the big abusers, like Google.
If the law actually said that, it would be great.
You never want laws to be ambiguously applied and to presume exemption because "it wouldn't happen to me". People will abuse laws: there will be spam scams aplenty selling snake-oil solutions, and ambulance chasers threatening to sue companies because they can. Excess legislation comes at a cost.
I am in favour of better privacy but I fail to see how counting unique visitors on a blog should become a crime. By setting the standard that everyone is violating the law, you encourage everyone to ignore your law.
But I can't see this changing in the medium term without some high-profile fines; someone needs to fine a major media company or similar simply for having Google analytics enabled. Then everyone will shout about their world collapsing, and try to find new forms of allowed dark pattern.
Really the only way to get out ahead of this mess would be to "lean in" and make a browser-level technological mechanism for providing consent. Maybe standardise the "session cookie" somehow, so all the required functionality can hang off that.
I'm counting on the German cease-and-desist industry to kick-start that - now that I think about it, I'm actually surprised it has happened yet.
Their entire 'industry' is just shitting on people in the lower middle classes and below for a few hundreds bucks per case.
With this they'd actually have to represent in court for every case. It's easier for them to just keep leeching of people that can't fight back
ad-blockers and Private windows?
I hope that if I say 'No' on one website to doubleclick, adwords, analytics, etc, those aren't going to just reappear for every other website.
If it's purely something each website is implementing, that won't happen, so I'm looking forward to some standard that all browsers will use.
The UK could have just developed their own adblocker or educated everyone about adblocking, cookie blacklisting, browser settings, anything would be fine.
Do you think the average visitor will take time to go through each message and only enable 1st party services required for the website to function? Just like the annoying cookie banner, people will quickly become blind to that section of the screen and spam click on whatever appears just so they can get rid of it and read the page.
This line is a bit disingenuous, as all of these guidelines are simply what “GDPR-ing” was supposed to be in the first place. Any website owner that contracted for someone to make their website GDPR-compliant that runs afoul of these rules should insist on getting their money back.
First and foremost, it will desensitize people about these messages, until they habitually click on everything presented to them.
... including giving away the title to their soul.
The trouble is that the industry seems to focus more on what they can get away with then what they need to change. Even the GPDR consultants/privacy lawyers focus not on what is required by law, but on how to circumvent as much of it as possible.
All 'BeCAUse iT Is sUcH a drACOnian LaW' - Well guess why that is the case. We keep perverting it in the name of marketing. It's just a race to the bottom in the end.
If there is no regulatory punishment for ignoring the law, than any organization following the law actually has a commercial disadvantage against all the opponents not following the law.
That's way no one is willing to follow the rules. Legal requirements that do not get enforced are just meaningless.
It's very rare that they sue a gmbh or ag. They generally only go for soft targets
