58
Guardian not Respecting GDPR? (media.piefed.zip)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/gdpr@sopuli.xyz
33 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 10 points 4 months ago (7 children)

I believe you should be able to “reject all” as simply as “accept all” for cookies according to the GDPR.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    I mean it’s right there… there is a reject and an accept. The issue is this site doesn’t let you read the article unless you do another thing… but you can reject the cookies very easily.

    The worst is “Accept all” and “Customise choices” which brings up 100+ slide checks which are all pre-populated.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    No there isn't. There's a "reject all and subscribe" which is not the same thing as a pure "reject all." The law doesn't allow them to impose extra conditions (subscribing) like that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -2 points 4 months ago

    The lawyers will say the “Reject” option successfully rejected the cookies on that first click, but if you still want to read the the article you have to pay.

    I can see the coercion issue, where 99% of people are coerced into agreement, but that has yet to be defined as illegal.

    In the meantime I’m going to keep hitting the “reader view” button before the cookie pop up appears.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 8 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    It’s not a single click though. It is way more friction to reject then accept. So it def goes against spirit of EU rules.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Is it better if the articles were just behind a paywall? So no one could access them without paying? Sadly that is the alternative for journalistic content online.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Can you take the boot out of your mouth so we can understand what you're trying to say

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -2 points 4 months ago

    I just use “reader view” before the pop up appears. Not exactly a fan of the situation in either case, just pointing out the law is flawed and so is the implementation, but the most wrong thing is the legislation.

    No need for ad hominem attacks here

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent