1147
submitted 2 months ago by jeena@piefed.jeena.net to c/europe@feddit.org

The "Accept all" button is often the standard for cookie banners. An administrative court has ruled that the opposite offer is also necessary.

Lower Saxony's data protection officer Denis Lehmkemper can report a legal victory in his long-standing battle against manipulatively designed cookie banners. The Hanover Administrative Court has confirmed his legal opinion in a judgment of March 19 that has only just been made public: Accordingly, website operators must offer a clearly visible "reject all" button on the first level of the corresponding banner for cookie consent requests if there is also the frequently found "accept all" option. Accordingly, cookie banners must not be specifically designed to encourage users to click on consent and must not prevent them from rejecting the controversial browser files.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 172 points 2 months ago

We and our 908 partners store and access personal data, like browsing data or unique identifiers, on your device.

Absolutely, we need a Reject All button!

[-] Jajcus@sh.itjust.works 60 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

And it should include this mysterious 'legitimate interest', or whatever it is called - always on by default in 'my choices', even though no one seems to be able to explain what this means. How can I make an informed consent on something that vague?

On the other hand, not 'Reject All', but 'Reject All except functionally necessary' (which should be precisely regulated by the law), otherwise there will be no cookie to remember our 'reject all' choice, which I am sure the corpos would happily use do discourage us from clicking that.

[-] sfxrlz@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 2 months ago

That shit makes me so mad. What the fuck is legitimate interest if not the cookies which are set anyway to make the site function It’s just purposefully misleading.

[-] unwarlikeExtortion@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 months ago

It's basicallly just a label they beed to slap to suddenly be avle to circumvent some forms of non-consent. There's also overriding legitimate interest (just as vague btw so it covers everything).

In other words, legitimate interest is a form of rape (what with the circumcenting consent and all)

[-] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 19 points 2 months ago

I'm sure "functionally necessary" already means we share your data with everyone because we setup a system where the local page state is managed by third parties that we are selling your data to.

[-] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 2 months ago

Rejecting cookies without asking every time requires a cookie and that is clearly legitimate interest. The problem with legitimate interest is that it's not well defined enough and then you have companies claiming that Adsense personalization is an absolute necessity for their website.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] lime@feddit.nu 9 points 2 months ago

the "functionally necessary" cookies, which are served by the site itself (e.g. not a third party), do not require a banner at all. if you have no third party cookies, you can do entirely without it.

[-] Anonymaus@feddit.org 13 points 2 months ago

I have also seen on some websites that you have to pay them through subscription if you want to reject all cookies

[-] renard_roux@beehaw.org 6 points 2 months ago

Pretty sure that's illegal AF. Report them?

[-] Anonymaus@feddit.org 4 points 2 months ago

Will do when I encounter any more

[-] renard_roux@beehaw.org 7 points 2 months ago

Literally saw one with 1300+ the other day, thought I was going insane 😳

[-] Dojan@pawb.social 3 points 2 months ago

Have to individually reject each and every fucking “partner.”

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] skisnow@lemmy.ca 59 points 2 months ago
[-] ameancow@lemmy.world 16 points 2 months ago

The irony made me exhale a burst of air from my nose before closing the page, never to return.

Basically every cookie acceptance agreement popup is just a 404 to me. No webpage has important enough information anymore for me to sign any kind of agreement. It's absurd. If you passed by a shop and wanted to go in and purchase something, but a clerk stopped you at the door and made you sign a fucking agreement that store would die in a month.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 54 points 2 months ago
[-] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 22 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Heise Group, you greedy cocks.

Here's a version of that article that doesn't deliberately ~~break~~ skirt as far as legally possible EU privacy law: https://archive.ph/ZTt3K

[-] Hubi@feddit.org 7 points 2 months ago

Heise is not breaking EU law with this. The law states that there must be an option to reject all cookies, whether it's a paid option or not is up to the site.

[-] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

~~This is no longer true thanks to a ruling by the European Data Protection Board.~~ Hang on, I was misreading. I believe there's been a recent ruling, but this one ain't it.


EDIT: See pages 39 and 40. ~~Here, it seems as though no "equivalent alternative" is provided under these criteria. It seems to me like consent-or-pay is heading toward an eventual ban, but Heise makes it clear on their website you can consent, pay, or leave – i.e. not an "equivalent alternative" to my mind.~~


EDIT 2: Okay, upon reading these criteria further, it seems like this isn't a violation of EU law but that it's reaaaally close and that the EDPB really hates consent-or-pay as a loophole and wants it to die as soon as possible. If not breaking the law, it's still an ethical nightmare, so the first line of my comment stands: "Heise Group, you greedy cocks."

[-] Hubi@feddit.org 5 points 2 months ago

so the first line of my comment stands: “Heise Group, you greedy cocks.”

Fair enough :D

[-] selokichtli@lemmy.ml 47 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

The kind of stupid shit societies have to invest money in. Don't get me wrong, it's good news, it's just baffling that money had to be invested in order to get these bastards to do the civil thing.

[-] sudo@lemmy.today 18 points 2 months ago

'its baffling in a capitalist society, corporations do everything they can to squeeze the most money out of their users with zero regard for the users wants or needs, and do whatever they can to skirt legal obligations that protect consumer privacy and security'

Yeah. I'm baffled.

[-] x00z@lemmy.world 35 points 2 months ago

Fuck you pieces of shit.

Go track this:

[-] abbadon420@lemm.ee 8 points 2 months ago

I usually just do this:

close window button

[-] Geth@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 2 months ago

A disgusting behavior that I've seen in Spain is for websites to direct you to their subscription page if you say you don't want to be tracked, either you pay for the content or you don't get any content. Apparently the Spanish courts have deemed this legal.

[-] rinze@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 months ago

If you use uBlock Origin, add the following rule:

* privacy-center.org * block

This kills 99 % of the "accept or pay" modals, an you can still access the page normally.

[-] PieMePlenty@lemmy.world 22 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Also, require its html tag to have an attribute "data-legal-reject" or something like that so we can have browsers auto reject all that shit - while keeping necessary ones.

Better yet, attach this at the protocol level. "X-Cookie-Policy: ImportantOnly" or something like that.

[-] pennomi@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

Yeah, there’s no reason why this should be anywhere except the browser level.

[-] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 17 points 2 months ago

Cookie banners need to piss off forever. You may set some functional cookies only if I log in.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] OldChicoAle@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago

I recently started to use "I still don't care about cookies". So far so good.

[-] Localhorst86@feddit.org 12 points 2 months ago

The issue about that extension is this:

When it's needed for the website to work properly, it will automatically accept the cookie policy for you (sometimes it will accept all and sometimes only necessary cookie categories, depending on what's easier to do).

It will often just accept the cookies as is.

[-] ewo@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 2 months ago

This and Consent-o-matic

[-] latenightnoir 15 points 2 months ago

FINALLY! I was wondering how long it'd take for people to act upon the fact that Permission prompts have become THE biggest digital grift. The answer: way too fucking long!

[-] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago

You wonder, why do they not just make it illegal to use cookies at all (other than for legitimate purposes like loggin in).

Who actually wants to accept?

[-] DacoTaco@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

As much as i would love to see that, youll be burning down a multi-billion, if not trillion, worth market.
Also, idk if i want the alternative of cookie tracking to be used as much as cookie tracking. Scary stuff

[-] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago

youll be burning down a multi-billion, if not trillion, worth market.

Oh no

Also, idk if i want the alternative of cookie tracking to be used as much as cookie tracking. Scary stuff

Here's an idea, you outlaw that also

We have been in the wild west of the internet the last 20 years or so, and you wonder when we're finally going to actively police it

[-] DacoTaco@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Ok, lets go down the line of things happening here.
You kill data mining, great, awesome! You have my support!
Oh, but suddenly, worldwide, hundred of thousands of job fall. Data brokers fall first. Their servers drop and the thousands of project managers, database administrators, developers, product managers and all in between get without a job.
Ok but fine, maybe they can find a new job! Positive thinking! It is a big world after all!

Oh, but the data brokers are gone, so now analysists cant tell what people will like, what they dont, what works and doesnt. Whoops. But hey, nothing bad those are gone! Maybe they can find jobs down town in the factory that doesnt exists or uses robots.

No analysists, so maybe trying to make that one show or product you like doesnt sound that attractive to produce anymore. Hey, who knows who'll buy it right? Maybe that product you like will make a few wrong guesses and die out. But nothing bad, another company will fill the hole left behind by dieing companies!

Now scientists ( im including computer scientists here ) cant access data at large anymore either because data brokers are forbidden in proxy. Shit, how are we going to get our data about diseases now. From a limited set? Okidoki! Our research says 90% of tested people get cancer from drinking water. Water is deadly now guys! Our data of 10 people said it was!
How do we process patient data to find problems before hand, easy we dont lawl. Who needs that stuff anyway!

Oh hey, since nobody is allowed to collect and sell data anymore, those few sites you use will die. They cant maintain the costs of research & development nor the hosting. So they have to paywall their site or close the doors, like the good old days with newspapers, pubs, cafe's and television! Those were the days! But i like to pay for quality stuff so they can live! Ok, now lets do that for every site you visit and use in your day-to-day life!

Look, you get the picture i hope. I hate data collecting and have systems in check to hopefully poison the well myself. But your shortsighted approach is not the solution. The world is a hell a lot more complex than that.
Sources to this line of thinking: me, who works in healthcare, my brother working as a project manager in a data company to use in researches, and my other brother working as cto in electricity facilities.

[-] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

They cant maintain the costs of research & debelopment nor the hosting. So they have to paywall their site or close the doors

The irony of posting this comment on Lemmy, which runs based on donations. It isn't paywalled, and doesn't require data mining to operate. As well as Wikipedia which is completely free, and wildly successful. Which again doesn't need to violate your privacy to continue existing.

Not to mention, not every website is making money off selling your data, and are instead selling goods or services. Which can continue to operate and make money just fine.

The fact you think the economy would collapse because data miners would lose their jobs, is showing your bias.

Nek minnit you'll be telling me we ought not stop fighting needless wars whenever the US beckons us, because of all the poor weapons contractors losing work (massive hyperbole, but you get my point).

People working in data mining have heaps of transferrable skills, they would be totally fine.

The internet existed before enshitification, and it certainly could afterwards.

Would you have to pay a little more to access certain things? Sure. But I find the argument that the internet would cease to function very unconvincing.

[-] sartalon@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Datamining is the reason every fucking second of our lives is monetized.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[-] Irelephant@lemm.ee 9 points 2 months ago

As usual, this should have been the responsibility of browsers, not individual websites.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] digdilem@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 months ago

Another layer of annoying on a massively stupid piece of legislation that has made the internet immeasurably worse for everyone.

These preferences should be settable in the browser, transferred during http* connection and honoured by every single website you use.

Any changes that marketeers come up with should be ratified in the same way that changes to internet protocols are, and if the browser doesn't support them yet, they are assumed "do not".

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] rumba@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 months ago

Just a bunch of idiots that have no idea how shit works.

If they can reject all, but can't stay logged in after trying to navigate the site, who's fault is that?

but I can already here, but you can work around that

Guess what? The workaround is tracking. we're just re-inventing cookies.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 22 May 2025
1147 points (100.0% liked)

Europe

6880 readers
753 users here now

News and information from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
  10. Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.

(This list may get expanded as necessary.)

Posts that link to the following sources will be removed

Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media. Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com

(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)

Ban lengths, etc.

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the primary mod account @EuroMod@feddit.org

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS