No good deed goes unpunished. Don't protect users' privacy, and you get flak from regulators for "not doing enough". Protect users' privacy, and you get flak from regulators because it's "too complex and hurts small companies that rely on advertising revenue". You see similar levels of cynicism directed at Google. When firefox banned third party cookies, it was almost universally welcomed, but when Chrome does it the cynics come out and say how it's actually some sort dastardly ploy to cement their position in the ad market because third party adtech firms are disproportionately harmed.
France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
21–30 of 217 posts
Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
#22Actually Apple were fined because they don't apply the same standard to their own pop-ups that allow users to reject tracking. On Apple popups you seem to need one click, while on 3rd party popups you need to confirm twice. So the fine seems to be for treating 3rd parties differently from their own stuff. They could make their own popups require double confirmation instead...
Right, but that second click isn't coming from Apple and they can't control it. The article specifically says that many apps feel like they need additional consent which means they have to request it through two channels.
If Apple doesn't feel like they need additional consent and/or doesn't use ATT-blocked systems then they don't need that.
This is stupid.
Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
#23No good deed goes unpunished. Don't protect users' privacy, and you get flak from regulators for "not doing enough". Protect users' privacy, and you get flak from regulators because it's "too complex and hurts small companies that rely on advertising revenue". You see similar levels of cynicism directed at Google. When firefox banned third party cookies, it was almost universally welcomed, but when Chrome does it the…
One benefits directly while the other doesn't. Plus many people complained.
Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
#24Do other apps require double consent or is it actually a dark pattern they’ve adopted: * explain and prompt the user for consent * if they acquiesce pop the real modal * otherwise bide your time and try again later The reason for this is because once you receive a rejection in the official modal you are not allowed to ask again.
>Do other apps require double consent or is it actually a dark pattern they’ve adopted: It's specifically recommended by apple. https://developer.apple.com/design/human-interface-guideline...
In adtech and social media it is a calculated strategy to maximize user compliance.
Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is referring to Apple's first party apps so no they aren't third party. I can understand why someone would make that argument but the French regulator argument here is that in the spirit of competition, third-parties should have the same barrier to entry as Apple's first party apps and I can see the argument they are making.
I feel like if the apps have their own tracking then yes one click makes sense. If they include third party then multi consent also makes sense. They’re not contradictory points.
Yeah.
Not sure how you collect all the necessary consent clicks without at least two clicks if a third party is involved?
Do they get a pass on collecting a consent click for one of the parties?
Or do you only ever need the consent for the third party to track?
My understanding was you needed to get consent for every company in the chain. Is that untrue?
Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
#26Actually Apple were fined because they don't apply the same standard to their own pop-ups that allow users to reject tracking. On Apple popups you seem to need one click, while on 3rd party popups you need to confirm twice. So the fine seems to be for treating 3rd parties differently from their own stuff. They could make their own popups require double confirmation instead...
Right, but that second click isn't coming from Apple and they can't control it. The article specifically says that many apps feel like they need additional consent which means they have to request it through two channels. If Apple doesn't feel like they need additional consent and/or doesn't use ATT-blocked systems then they don't need that. This is stupid.
> The article specifically says that many apps feel like they need additional consent
Are they right about that? Does Apple provide the app with confirmation that the user consented, and if they do, is it legal to rely on that confirmation?
Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
#27Actually Apple were fined because they don't apply the same standard to their own pop-ups that allow users to reject tracking. On Apple popups you seem to need one click, while on 3rd party popups you need to confirm twice. So the fine seems to be for treating 3rd parties differently from their own stuff. They could make their own popups require double confirmation instead...
Right, but that second click isn't coming from Apple and they can't control it. The article specifically says that many apps feel like they need additional consent which means they have to request it through two channels. If Apple doesn't feel like they need additional consent and/or doesn't use ATT-blocked systems then they don't need that. This is stupid.
Right.
I'm not sure this is fixable?
Or maybe there is widespread misunderstanding of the requirements in this scenario? But I also thought the rule was tough enough to require verifying that extra consent? Maybe it's not?
Truly confused here.
Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
#28Do other apps require double consent or is it actually a dark pattern they’ve adopted: * explain and prompt the user for consent * if they acquiesce pop the real modal * otherwise bide your time and try again later The reason for this is because once you receive a rejection in the official modal you are not allowed to ask again.
>Do other apps require double consent or is it actually a dark pattern they’ve adopted: It's specifically recommended by apple. https://developer.apple.com/design/human-interface-guideline...
Apple's recommendation (as posted) actually doesn't look like double consent to me - in fact, their recommendation calls out that it should be treated like a consent form (You shouldn't be able to exit the explanation page, only continue).
App Publishers have instead used the explanation page as a "soft" consent form, so they can bug you later without being disabled at the system level.
Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
#29> Benoit Coeure, the head of France's competition authority, "told reporters the regulator had not spelled out how Apple should change its app, but that it was up to the company to make sure it now complied with the ruling,"
Sounds like a good shakedown to me. Wait until they tweak it then fine them again for getting it “wrong”. I wonder if they even got the chance to change anything before they were fined the first time. And all because the regulator wants users to be advertised to more?
Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right, but that second click isn't coming from Apple and they can't control it. The article specifically says that many apps feel like they need additional consent which means they have to request it through two channels. If Apple doesn't feel like they need additional consent and/or doesn't use ATT-blocked systems then they don't need that. This is stupid.
> The article specifically says that many apps feel like they need additional consent Are they right about that? Does Apple provide the app with confirmation that the user consented, and if they do, is it legal to rely on that confirmation?
You can definitely check on whether the user answered yes to the prompt, because if they declined you'll get a null (ie. all 0s) uuid. Whether app developers can rely on that as confirmation for tracking on their side is a purely legal question, and I wish the French government would try to resolve it on their side rather than going straight to fining Apple.