New EU Cookie Law

WilliamO

Displaying a name online

If your business has a website, you must display:

general information about your business - including business name, address, email address, VAT registration number (if applicable)

details of any relevant professional body that you belong to or any authorisation scheme to which your service is subject

Richie-from-the-Boro

It appears I'm a lone voice here, I'd like to see a clear unambiguous 2 button only consent one of which says Explicit Consent [Opt-in]

- you go on a site, the pop-up appears - the end user chooses sod off mate [opt out] - that stands forever
- big red cross / opt out - big green tick / opt in, unambiguous and easy for all
- two buttons only - no fudging compliance with information only / customisation and other [STRIKE]smoke screen[/STRIKE] variables
- protection of individual freedoms online is a good thing, the only people who disagree are those who profit from stealing my information
- the current system of suppressing the UI without opting in requires a 'cookie' that steals your information
- customers of ASDA et al including me who want the add products / basket / checkout functions can explicitly opt in to that site
- its the company who run the sites, not the developer who is responsible for legislation
- if ever I get my wish [it apples to tracking as well as cookies] someone will invent and alternative, for example 'flash' to track customers
- the customers given a choice will always go 10% acceptance and 90% opt-out, why not ? we don't want them / need them / use them / profit from them !

Stealing because I'm not given a choice. It's like the old days of the iniquitous 'Phorm' where the only option in the UK was take it or else, supported by our very honourable political masters and legislators. Am I the only bloke in the UK that doesn't like em / want em / buy from em ? I don't want tracking, I don't want spam, I don't want my information stolen. Not having tacking / spam etc will make no difference to me or to my browsing habits - am I a lone voice ?.

Mista_C

paulstar wrote: »

Interesting. I've just been looking at the ICO site which seems to suggest that implied consent is OK but then goes on to suggest opt-in is required for Analytics type cookies. And then it says:

"It should be remembered that the intention behind this Regulation is also to reflect concerns about the use of covert surveillance mechanisms online. Here, we are not referring to the collection of data in the context of conducting legitimate business online but the fact that so-called spyware can enter a terminal without the knowledge of the subscriber or user to gain access to information, store information or trace the activities of the user and that such activities often have a criminal purpose behind them."

Surely it could be demonstrated in a Court of Law that Google Analytics does not have a criminal purpose and therefore is not something the Regulation was designed to prevent, i.e. criminal activity. Perhaps we could encourage Google to take a test case to whatever kangaroo court rules on absurd EU legislation and obtain an opt-out from the opt-in requirement.

And MSE's banner reads: "We use 'cookie' files to help make your use of this site faster and easier. From this point, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on MoneySavingExpert.com. More Info/Change Settings" which looks like implied consent to me and does not require the user to opt in. I'm assuming MSE uses analytics or something similar.

As bazster says, nobody - not even the experts - knows for certain what is actually required. What chance have guys with one-man-and-a-dog websites got!

I think I'll be voting for UKIP from now on!

Precisely, the law is yet another tangle of red tape. The implied consent being an 11th hour amendment. In my case I'm acting as a business providing web site maintenance services to other businesses. I'd rather not take the chance of the law being (mis)interpreted at the whim of some jobsworth.

As it goes while Analytics doesn't really capture anything that could be used for criminal activity it doesn't require much of a change to someone with the knowledge to use for such purposes. It's more about covering backsides than informed consent.

The hosting provider I use actually captures more in-depth information on visitors than Analytics, including IP address and hostnames yet I have no control over any of that. The information is only used by myself in instances of abuse, denial of service attacks, etc. in order to restrict certain addresses or subnets.

I should add that social network interaction also requires consent even though it's the social networks themselves that hold the information covered by the regulation.

I put my initial thoughts at the time on the business blog. I can't post the link here (ToS) but if you Google the term "EU Kooky Directive" it's top of the page if anyone is curious.

bazster

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

It appears I'm a lone voice here, I'd like to see a clear unambiguous 2 button only consent one of which says Explicit Consent [Opt-in]

The trouble with this, as I was discussing yesterday with a client, is that most visitors will not have a clue about what it is they are being asked to opt-in/out of, and a goodly proportion will be spooked by it and will simply sod off to a competitor's site where they do not get asked scary questions that they don't understand.

In other words, unless everyone is doing it you are putting yourself at a competitive disadvantage.

paulstar

bazster wrote: »

The trouble with this, as I was discussing yesterday with a client, is that most visitors will not have a clue about what it is they are being asked to opt-in/out of, and a goodly proportion will be spooked by it and will simply sod off to a competitor's site where they do not get asked scary questions that they don't understand.

In other words, unless everyone is doing it you are putting yourself at a competitive disadvantage.

Yes indeed. And when all EU-based websites comply to where will users sod off? To sites hosted in the USA, Far East...

EU hobbling EU companies to the benefit of the rest of the world.

mr_fishbulb

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

It appears I'm a lone voice here, I'd like to see a clear unambiguous 2 button only consent one of which says Explicit Consent [Opt-in]

- you go on a site, the pop-up appears - the end user chooses sod off mate [opt out] - that stands forever

But how will the site remember that the user has told it that they don't want cookies? You'd need some sort of cookie to do that.

Richie-from-the-Boro

mr_fishbulb wrote: »

But how will the site remember that the user has told it that they don't want cookies? You'd need some sort of cookie to do that.

- it won't remember or know anything because no cookie was set !
- that's the whole point of the big green tick

Richie-from-the-Boro

bazster wrote: »

The trouble with this, as I was discussing yesterday with a client, is that most visitors will not have a clue about what it is they are being asked to opt-in/out of, and a goodly proportion will be spooked by it and will simply sod off to a competitor's site where they do not get asked scary questions that they don't understand.

In other words, unless everyone is doing it you are putting yourself at a competitive disadvantage.

- my use of the big green tick certainly does not put me at a disadvantage
- it may put you / your site / the e-tailer at a disadvantage, but not myself
- I can choose to explicitly add functions that are needed for any individual purpose on any individual site
- lets say I visit 20,000 sites in a month but purchase from only 4 in a month so 19.996 don't need my information - they just want it !
- 99.9% of all purchases made in the UK are made by UK residents from UK companies, or ;
- 99.9% of all purchases made in the EU are made by EU residents from EU companies
- no one is going to sod off to Dubai or the USA to buy a pack of 4 Duracell AAA's

""" unless everyone is doing it"""

I'm all for everyone doing it, but I'm all for the big green explicit consent tick version. Let me .. .. let all of us individually decide whether we want to be tracked / spammed and have our info stolen. What's wrong with explicit consent ?. The only people unafraid of explicit consent are your average 99% of the citizens we get no benefit from cookies & spamming & tracking and make no profit from these practices, why would that disadvantage us or make us afraid ?

bazster

I trust you are not expecting anyone to be persuaded by your utterly self-centred and fatuous arguments?

There is nothing wrong with explicit consent so long as everyone is doing it. Otherwise it's the usual story of those who scrupulously follow the rules losing out to those who ignore them.

As it happens my client makes just a few hundred sales a year, every one of them running into thousands of pounds and often tens-of-thousands, and potential customers certainly could shop anywhere in the world for similar products. They cannot afford to risk losing a sale just because the moronic EU lawmakers want them to start asking visitors incomprehensible questions when in reality we're only talking about Analytics and some session cookies.

As someone said above, the web server actually collects more information about visitors, and that's not covered by this half-witted law. Not that we do anything with the info the web server collects anyway.

The bottom line is that until the entire industry worldwide is asking stupid questions that no-one understands then the only changes we will make are to the T & C's, and making them more prominent.

If that doesn't fit with your arrogant and self-centred view of the web, well tough.

Richie-from-the-Boro

bazster wrote: »

I trust you are not expecting anyone to be persuaded by your utterly self-centred and fatuous arguments?

There is nothing wrong with explicit consent so long as everyone is doing it. Otherwise it's the usual story of those who scrupulously follow the rules losing out to those who ignore them.

As it happens my client makes just a few hundred sales a year, every one of them running into thousands of pounds and often tens-of-thousands, and potential customers certainly could shop anywhere in the world for similar products. They cannot afford to risk losing a sale just because the moronic EU lawmakers want them to start asking visitors incomprehensible questions when in reality we're only talking about Analytics and some session cookies.

As someone said above, the web server actually collects more information about visitors, and that's not covered by this half-witted law. Not that we do anything with the info the web server collects anyway.

The bottom line is that until the entire industry worldwide is asking stupid questions that no-one understands then the only changes we will make are to the T & C's, and making them more prominent.

If that doesn't fit with your arrogant and self-centred view of the web, well tough.

- """utterly self-centred(1)""" - yes and perfectly entitled to be so, its called freedom of speech !
- """fatuous""" - no nothing absurd about my point of view, its just different to yours, that does not make it moronic .. .. just different
- """arrogant""" - no - there's nothing conceited, but there is an understandable self-importance about my personal freedom of speech !
- """self-centred view(2)""" - duplication

Which product at what margin of profit multiplied by 200 does your client sell that is of a magnitude so big that his/her customers would buy from an alternative site on the other side of the globe ? Can I assume its in the Warships and Military Aircraft category where 200 Aircraft Carriers is worth buying from a different country ?