Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 16:11:01 +0000 From: Spalls Hurgenson Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action Subject: Re: Paying to avoid cookeies? Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 12:11:01 -0400 Message-ID: References: X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 44 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-YjlXRBGN+NAMn0BL90w7WyiBGbnx6lk0sscztJ23BbVaJJqPXZiVvBm7yvVgX93TLNhz/kS27ZNcFCI!wY8fBvGVkqaYuaVWQJoag/HFe0aJqi3BQV9yJkTwRleeeKMZKEDGhPe0JY0hN7PjMuZdQg4G X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 Bytes: 3304 On Wed, 14 Aug 2024 10:22:17 +0100, JAB wrote: >Well at least it's computer related, so I read something that the online >version of The Daily Express newspaper have introduced a model that >allows you either to read it for free but then you must accept being >tracked with cookies or pay a subscription of £2 per-month to avoid >them. There have been some comments about whether that's allowed under >GDPR (the UK is still signed up although I'm surprised our last >government didn't scrap it as party of EU meddling*) and why on earth >would any pay to read that awful rag**? > >Putting those aside my first thought was that's ridiculous but my second >thought was why is it if you're getting a service for free then is it >really that unreasonable to make you pay for it indirectly in the same >way you can pay not to see ad's. So yeh why not although maybe it's a >sign of things to come? It is a completely illegal request however. The GDPR (of which the UK remains a signatory and have accepted as law, even if they have withdrawn from the EU) says that the choice offered end-users must be freely given, and must be given without any significant drawbacks. "No cookies == no see website" is in clear violation. It doesn't matter if there is a "you can pay to avoid cookies" option either. The only real exception is for 1st-party cookies (e.g., cookies set by the website you are actually visiting) used for 'essential' purposes such as log-in or keeping track of what page you're viewing. The GPDR very specifically bars so-called "cookie walls" where you can't see the site's content unless you allow all the cookies. What those websites are doing is blatantly against the GDPR and if they are doing business in EU or the UK, they can be held accountable for this violation. Fines are harsh too; €20 million Euro or 4% of yearly worldwide revenue, whichever is higher. Feel free to submit a complaint to ICO (the UK data protection agency) https://ico.org.uk/ or CNIL (for the rest of the EU) https://www.cnil.fr/en/home if you happen to reside in either of those two regions (sorry 'Merkins, you're shit outta luck, since there are no privacy protection laws for you!)