Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I told them forced consent was unlawful. 5 years later it cost Elkjop €1.8M

thatprivacyguy.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 308 posts

Re: I told them forced consent was unlawful. 5 years later it cost Elkjop €1.8M

#191

Post by AlexanderHanff »

0xfffafaCrash wrote: post #20

> The reply I received a few days later did me the favour of putting the violation on the record. Their position, in their own words, was that "in order to receive marketing / offers, it is a condition to be a member of the customer club." That one sentence is the whole case. They had taken a right I am entitled to exercise for free and turned it into the price of admission. I don’t understand… it would be one thing…

It is a translation thing - what they said in Norwegian was that it is required to accept marketing activities if you want to be part of the loyalty club - but the machine translation did it literally instead of changing the structure to match common English.

Re: I told them forced consent was unlawful. 5 years later it cost Elkjop €1.8M

#192

Post by rurban »

somenameforme wrote: post #177
rurban wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In normal states not. But there you have the very popular political system called fascism, where contracts override laws.

That doesn't even make any sense. Fascism is generally about top-down enforced control, whereas contracts are heavily decentralized. The world where you'd have contracts override laws would be some sort of extreme anarcho-libertarian society, which is rather the opposite of fascism.

That's what you heard in school, defending the US style of fascism as "democratic".

Fascism was a scheme to keep the old aristocrats turning industrialists to keep control of the state, whilst still keeping it under the democratic name. This was devised in the US in the 30ies and then in the old states also. Heavily supported by the US industrialists. Without them the fascism movement had no chance.

The US scheme of fascism came up with cooperate contracts overriding state laws, also pleasing the Chicago crowd, with decentralized control. At the will of the cooperations, who know better than the government of course. That's why Rockefeller could gun down strikers without any repercussions. That's why the Railroad Commission could call state military to gun down independent oil cooperations which undercut prizes of the industrialists. That's not liberalism, that's pure fascism/cooperatism/aristocratism.

Re: I told them forced consent was unlawful. 5 years later it cost Elkjop €1.8M

#193

Post by berege »

cwillu wrote: post #160
arjie wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haha they are cliches, yes. But a specific type of cliche that is unique to current language models. > That one sentence is the whole case This example, for instance, is more uniquely LLM than mere common cliche.

Gonna need you to expand on that, because I don't see how that sentence is “uniquely LLM” at all. It feels pretty typical for legal people speaking informally.

Lmao at the absolute ego behind that wording >Gonna need you to expend on that Sure boss everyone here is just waiting for your commands to meet your every need

Re: I told them forced consent was unlawful. 5 years later it cost Elkjop €1.8M

#194

Post by buzer »

veltas wrote: post #187
DarkUranium wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

When the official EU websites use the same kinds of annoying dialogs, how is this true?

Official EU website, generally speaking, are not bound by GDPR or ePD. Rather EU bodies are bound by EUDPR. I'm not well-versed on that specific thing, but EDPS and courts have previously found that EC has infringed EUDPR so it wouldn't be weird if their cookie banner was breaking the law as well.

Re: I told them forced consent was unlawful. 5 years later it cost Elkjop €1.8M

#195

Post by TonyStr »

ambicapter wrote: post #85

I understand where he's coming from, but it is still hilarious that he sued the legal entity that won the case for him, after they found the case in his favor.

Looking at the report from datatilsynet (Norwegian Data Protection Agency), they cite "multiple reports and tips" as the background. I suspect what happened here is that IMY concluded that this laid outside of their authority, submitted the complaint to datatilsynet and either closed the case and forgot to inform Hanff, or they may have never gotten any response from datatilsynet.

Re: I told them forced consent was unlawful. 5 years later it cost Elkjop €1.8M

#196

Post by AlexanderHanff »

cm2012 wrote: post #148
0xfffafaCrash wrote: post #20

> The reply I received a few days later did me the favour of putting the violation on the record. Their position, in their own words, was that "in order to receive marketing / offers, it is a condition to be a member of the customer club." That one sentence is the whole case. They had taken a right I am entitled to exercise for free and turned it into the price of admission. I don’t understand… it would be one thing…

He was an Elkjøp/Elgiganten customer club member. He wanted to keep the club membership and discounts/offers, but stop the marketing emails. Elkjøp’s setup told him the only way to stop the marketing was to cancel the club membership altogether. To me, Elkjop seems perfectly reasonable here. But EU policy disagrees.

You might well think it is reasonable, but the law doesn't permit this, it is explicit that the person has an absolute right not to be subjected to direct marketing activities (Article 21 of the GDPR) and Article 5 of the GDPR requires that any processing of personal data must comply with all other relevant laws in order to be lawful under the GDPR - ePrivacy Directive (Article 13) governs Direct Marketing in the EU and requires consent - but that consent must meet the requirements of Article 7 under the GDPR in order to be valid (freely given) and any consent which is bundled and is a condition of access to a service where such processing is not necessary to provide that service - is not considered as freely given.

This is not new, we have a lot of case law and regulatory guidance on this.

Re: I told them forced consent was unlawful. 5 years later it cost Elkjop €1.8M

#197

Post by berege »

cwillu wrote: post #113
arjie wrote: post #51

It's an interesting story, but I could not help but have my mind skip over it because of the LLMisms. Acts like one of those taboola reels to me. If even just there was a tutorial to get people to write in such a way that it's not obviously LLM text it would be nice because the story is interesting. I know, it's like complaining about JS etc. but it's like walking into an elevator and smelling very strong perfume. It…

> LLMisms The word is “cliches”, and they existed long before LLMs.

Cliches in general did, llms created new ones even though you may not be adept at recognising them

Re: I told them forced consent was unlawful. 5 years later it cost Elkjop €1.8M

#198

Post by AlexanderHanff »

TonyStr wrote: post #195
ambicapter wrote: post #85

I understand where he's coming from, but it is still hilarious that he sued the legal entity that won the case for him, after they found the case in his favor.

Looking at the report from datatilsynet (Norwegian Data Protection Agency), they cite "multiple reports and tips" as the background. I suspect what happened here is that IMY concluded that this laid outside of their authority, submitted the complaint to datatilsynet and either closed the case and forgot to inform Hanff, or they may have never gotten any response from datatilsynet.

I have had several direct discussion with the Norwegian DPA throughout the case, the inspection and investigation were triggered by the IMY cross border case and I have not "sued" the regulator (neither do I say I have) I have filed a complaint against IMY (the Swedish Regulator) for failure to meet their legal obligations under Article 77(2) but then I have already had to file multiple legal complaints against IMY because they are an absolutely terrible supervisory authority that do literally nothing (they send out postcards to Data Controllers for violations saying "Hey do you know what GDPR is?").

So no, I have not sued the Norwegian DPA and actually have a very good relationship with them along with most of the other EU DPAs (I am an advisor to them, I sit in the pool of experts for law and new technologies at the EDPB which includes ALL EU data protection authorities).

Re: I told them forced consent was unlawful. 5 years later it cost Elkjop €1.8M

#200

Post by AlexanderHanff »

QuantumNomad_ wrote: post #25
pavel_lishin wrote: post #5

The image isn't loading for me, all I see is the prompt used to generate it - which is genuinely preferable.

For me it was showing the image and the prompt, but the whole page was unstyled. But when I reloaded the page now, the css loaded also and the prompt is not shown. I guess the web server was temporarily overwhelmed by traffic resulting in images (like for you) and css files (like for me) not being consistently served to all visitors.

If you click the image, it flips to reveal the prompt and other metadata.

The blog is running on a Mac Mini on a 1Gb/s uplink so when it gets hit with a front page HN post, it does creak a little but I try to be environmentally responsible with my technology (as much as possible) so I am not in a hurry to move it into a datacentre when currently it only pulls 15-25W from the wall during peak traffic.

Post reply on HN