181–190 of 308 posts
I am a EU citizen, I bought a (Chinese) robotic lawn mower. One day, end of April when the grass is growing very rapidly, they presented me with a dialog in the app that basically said. "We updated the EULA with the explanation "optimized wordings". Please accept." There was no reference to the new or old EULA, and if I didn't accept I could not start the app and use my new mower. It was bricked. I am now checking th…
This article reads like “jurisprudence fetishist gets off on technicality!” How refreshingly European.
I'm sure I am wrong somewhere. But can someone explain to me how this same reasoning would not apply to every advertizing 'supported' business? You can't opt-out off ads on many websites or streaming services and still hsve access.
There's nothing problematic about having Stihl advertise chainsaws on a page for lumberjack. There is a problem when you collect data from across the internet, conclude that a person might be a lumberjack and serve the chainsaw ads based on that information on a news site.
Sadly the advertising industry is mostly dead, at least online. We're left with online marketing experts that are basically just clicking around in Google and Meta ad-management interfaces. They know nothing about the sites or content, nor do they care. The magical box will find the customers... and if it gets it wrong, no worries, it wasn't their money anyway and you can always just go "Well, advertising isn't an exact science, some of your spending was always going to be wasted, you just don't know which part".
Now we're left with an online advertising industry that can't tell advertising and tracking apart, and it doesn't have the skills or the network to go directly to sites and buy ad-space.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Up to 4% of turnover. So if they make more than that it is still profitable to keep going. Not that it is likely that they make that much in profit, but still. There probably shouldn’t be a limit, and there probably should be personal legal consequences such as jail time for repeat offenders.
You can apply a fine multiple times in a year if they don’t stop. As that 4% is based on global revenue you’re eventually going to make it unprofitable.
Anyway this is all purely academic. 99% of violations aren't going to increase profit by more than the maximum fine (or even anywhere remotely near that) thus it seems to me that the law has sufficiently broad coverage for addressing a behavior that does not directly result in physical injury.
I'm so glad the GDPR never took hold in the US. Little Karens getting companies fined millions of dollars over what amounts to nothing. You can always not use their service. Plenty of alternatives out there.
Norway has in practice only two big box electronics chains. Not always "pleny of alternatives out there"
I am a EU citizen, I bought a (Chinese) robotic lawn mower. One day, end of April when the grass is growing very rapidly, they presented me with a dialog in the app that basically said. "We updated the EULA with the explanation "optimized wordings". Please accept." There was no reference to the new or old EULA, and if I didn't accept I could not start the app and use my new mower. It was bricked. I am now checking th…
Sounds like a clear case.
But EU countries have authorities for this that helps filing issues they find legitimate. e.g. https://www.imy.se/en/news/administrative-fee-against-spotif...
But also the Norwegian twin mentioned in TFA.
As of now I am mostly collecting data to probe their compliance.
I wonder if anyone who are cheering this fine, actually read and tried to implement GDPR. It is a nightmare to be fully compliant for small companies. It is mostly just a theater (like endless cookie consent dialogs in anonymous browsing), to employ more experts and bureaucrats. EU is now pushing privacy laws that severely undermine privacy.
The cookie consent dialogs were never required in this form. That was literally just malicious compliance in order to get people mad at the law instead of the companies (at least at first, there's also a huge amount of cargo-culting nowadays). Congrats, you've been psy-opped.
I personally know other people who have filed similar complaints, and the Norwegian Datatilsynet explicitly stated they acted based on many complaints. I don't think they care about a single person's voice in this, even if they "helped create the law". It's a shame, but it probably says more about Datatilsynet's capacity. Frankly it would be great if you could simply say "this company did something dodgy", provide pr…
This, at least to my understanding, runs contrary to the spirit of the GDPR regulations. Permission has to be freely given which, when the alternative is paying a subscription, it quite obviously isn't.
I'm glad it all worked out for this individual. I hope more people live their lives like this as the dystopia progresses. Unfortunately, especially in the US, exercising your rights, or even just reading every paper you're expected to put your name to, not only constantly pisses people off for some reason, but also puts you at a significant disadvantage compared to the people that never push back in the interest of n…
I am that person that reads every line of the contracts I sign, including ToS and PP. I appreciate that I can tell who it rubs the wrong way, because it tells me who will shake my hand without intending to honor their word. It changed the way I write these documents as well, the last ToS and PP I wrote can each be read in a single breath.
The terms and conditions for Tetris on Android were longer than the entire works of Tolkien when combined.
So yes, it would be nice to read all of these things, but we simply do not have the time available to do so.