231–240 of 297 posts
Note that this is 10% of revenue so it is quite substantial.
And 30% of profit, looks like: > Authority imposes a fine of 100 Mio NOK (€ 9.63 Mio or $ 11.69 Mio) on Grindr. An enormous fine, as Grindr only reported a profit of $ 31 Mio in 2019 - a third of which is now gone.
They are sending all of their user's data with an "opt out" flag and leaving it to the ad companies to honor it? Slow clap? It also caught my eye that their TOS didn't allow users a choice in data sharing, it was either agree or don't use the app. That might have some wide ramifications, I've encountered many web sites that won't let you past the sharing opt-in until you click agree - i.e. it is impossible to disagre…
> If they have no assets in Norway I imagine it may be hard to collect from them. I thought, but have never verified, that fines given as GDPR enforcement can be collected throughout the EU/EEA. If this is true, and if European courts uphold the fines when Grindr undoubtedly challenge them, then it's my understanding that the Norwegian DPA can have Grindr assets elsewhere in the EEA seized. Does anyone know for sure?
If the Norwegian DPA is the one handling this case, probably that's because Grindr's EU operations are legally established in Norway. If they don't have an "establishment" in the EU, then I think it's up-for-grabs, and my gut is that NOYB would have preferred to file in France or Germany.
This is why GDPR actions against Facebook, Google, etc. all go through the (under-resourced) Irish DPA: US companies are all based there for tax reasons. It's... becoming a problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The various dark patterns employed by these consent systems are fairly opaque to anyone who bothers to open them, and are clearly deliberate attempts at maintaining the old status quo of "opt-in by default". Frankly, I am surprised at how few of these fines are flying around, though I am quite happy to hear they _are_ happening. I do get that this type of regulation is very disruptive to many companies, but if they c…
I’ve also wondered why there aren’t “enough” fines. Are the countries just being cautious because they want to establish precedent before going after the “big fish” like Facebook or Google? Or is it something else?
The GDPR has always amazed me. It changed the playing field from "you can use our free app as long as you give us data for marketing or not use it" to "you can provide a free service in the EU as long as you dont collect data for marketing or dont provide it" Without making a judgement on the merits of the approach, as a user/individual I appreciate the power this gives to protect my data. As a company/developer the…
I see this as a "it's so hard to run a business with all these rules" argument. We both know rules are extremely clear and simple. They get complicated when companies try to go around them.
Question in regards to the user consent pop-ups on websites: On sites that continue to let you browse without making a selection (say the consent banner in on the bottom of the browser window), If I don't make any choice, accept or reject, what happens? Am I giving consent by default?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably net zero, as long as everyone follows the same rules. Advertising is a zero-sum game, and changing the height of the playing field shouldn't impact relative revenue all that much.
As an advertiser, not true at all. Promoting products to any niche smaller than "man" or "woman" basically requires targeted advertising to make work.
Question in regards to the user consent pop-ups on websites: On sites that continue to let you browse without making a selection (say the consent banner in on the bottom of the browser window), If I don't make any choice, accept or reject, what happens? Am I giving consent by default?
You have to be able to use the site without giving consent too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing is, third-party SDKs often do data collection on their own. Or, even if they don't, they could do so, and you don't really know if they do or not.
Well, now the GDPR gives you 10% of your revenue as a reason for not using SDKs that will not give you control of data collection. You always had "respect the privacy of users" as a reason not to use them before, but we all know how well that worked.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As an advertiser, not true at all. Promoting products to any niche smaller than "man" or "woman" basically requires targeted advertising to make work.
Couldn't this be done based on content, without looking at personal data? "Here is an article on investment. How about I show an ad of an investment bank." If only one company does it, they lose. But if everyone is forced to do it, noone will lose.
It's also not a zero sum at all. An advertisement that is not within the user's interest is wasted, rather than going to the competitor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem here is that if you want to implement Facebook login in your app, you have to include the SDK. It is against ToS to do it any other way.
Then don't implement Facebook login in your app, unless SDK becomes adapted to make its use GDPR-compliant. It's really a problem between you and Facebook at this point.
The whole point of Facebook login and like was to collect data from unsuspecting users. Devs and product managers didn't care. GDPR makes this "laisser faire" attitude expensive.