• douglasg14b@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      In this case no not really.

      The cookie you might be using is going to be storage that’s going to contain your preferences. Assuming they actually applied by the regulations they claim to then that cookie actually won’t be used to track you it will simply be used for the intended purpose of cookies in the first place.

      Not that I agree with their approach but but they are essentially saying here is that since there is no way to save your privacy preferences they are not in compliance with the law by ensuring that you have set your privacy preferences. Which it’s kind of bullshit, dick move on their part.

      • FoxBJK@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s the most ironic part of GDPR. To avoid annoying the user, you have to set a cookie to remember that they don’t want you using cookies.

        We should’ve encouraged everyone to re-implement the “DNT” request header, or something similar. Much simpler for the site owners/devs, much more convenient for end-users.

        • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          10 months ago

          In EU law you do not have to ask for consent about storing preferences. Just for processing personal data, including IP address. So if they would not process personal data, everything would be fine.

        • fallingcats@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          The gdpr isn’t about cookies, it’s about tracking. Yes you should remember not to track if the user said so. Nothing ironic here.