I call bullshit on this one. France takes issue with Apple implementing App Tracking Transparency because it hurts advertisers? What exactly does France think following the law looks like? Allowing advertisers to track you by default? What Apple has done with ATT isn’t all that different from what the EU has required every damn website on the internet to do… ask permission to track.
More damning, in the ruling the court did not outline any specific way the software should change. This honestly just seems like a money grab on the part of France.
What principles is France and the EU after? Because this ruling makes it seem like it has no principles aside from “find any reason to issue a fine because the defendant is a big American company.”
I tend to agree with tightening regulations on tech, but there should at least be clear rules that can be followed, not arbitrary rules defined after the fact, if they’re defined at all.
Its not the EUs fault that US companies keep breaking the law. Don’t break the law, don’t get fined. It really is simple. EU companies aren’t getting these fines.
To be clear: you agree with France that advertisers should have free reign to track you because some app developers are small businesses?
If you didn’t read the article and are just being a little jingo right now, that’s what you’re defending. A fine that says you can’t protect users privacy if it interferes with small businesses, but also we have no specific requests for how you should change the tool.
No. The GDPR is an all encompassing law, the logic of which being giving people THE CHOICE to let apps personalise their ads, or not. Apple takes away that choice by not allowing tracking by default on a per-app basis. This is what is at stake.
What Apple is doing is indeed disrespecting the spirit of the law by taking away the choice of being tracked, while also damaging EU businesses who rely on advertising because believe it or not, there are many small app creators as well as small advertising companies operating in the EU.
My opinion on the matter is irrelevant, I’m just explaining what the case is about.
The advertising industry is real, and will keep existing, whether you like it or not. And yes, having the option to be an informed consumer and choose who gets to track you is a net positive. Some people LIKE targeted ads.
Plus, it’s not like Apple was protecting you from ads so I don’t know what your point even is? You’re defending them having a monopoly on who gets to advertise to you, nothing more nothing less.
I call bullshit on this one. France takes issue with Apple implementing App Tracking Transparency because it hurts advertisers? What exactly does France think following the law looks like? Allowing advertisers to track you by default? What Apple has done with ATT isn’t all that different from what the EU has required every damn website on the internet to do… ask permission to track.
More damning, in the ruling the court did not outline any specific way the software should change. This honestly just seems like a money grab on the part of France.
What principles is France and the EU after? Because this ruling makes it seem like it has no principles aside from “find any reason to issue a fine because the defendant is a big American company.”
I tend to agree with tightening regulations on tech, but there should at least be clear rules that can be followed, not arbitrary rules defined after the fact, if they’re defined at all.
Its not the EUs fault that US companies keep breaking the law. Don’t break the law, don’t get fined. It really is simple. EU companies aren’t getting these fines.
What law was broken? The court didn’t seem able to even articulate it. You can’t either.
Yes they did. Its a new precedent set based on anticompetitive practices. Shouldn’t be hard to understand.
I know the US is a full blown oligarchy where a few men are allowed to control everything, but the EU actually has some standards.
To be clear: you agree with France that advertisers should have free reign to track you because some app developers are small businesses?
If you didn’t read the article and are just being a little jingo right now, that’s what you’re defending. A fine that says you can’t protect users privacy if it interferes with small businesses, but also we have no specific requests for how you should change the tool.
No. The GDPR is an all encompassing law, the logic of which being giving people THE CHOICE to let apps personalise their ads, or not. Apple takes away that choice by not allowing tracking by default on a per-app basis. This is what is at stake.
What Apple is doing is indeed disrespecting the spirit of the law by taking away the choice of being tracked, while also damaging EU businesses who rely on advertising because believe it or not, there are many small app creators as well as small advertising companies operating in the EU.
So you are defending advertisers against users by calling it a choice? You think tracking is a net good that any informed person would opt in to?
You’re defending immoral practices by saying it’s the law.
My opinion on the matter is irrelevant, I’m just explaining what the case is about.
The advertising industry is real, and will keep existing, whether you like it or not. And yes, having the option to be an informed consumer and choose who gets to track you is a net positive. Some people LIKE targeted ads.
Plus, it’s not like Apple was protecting you from ads so I don’t know what your point even is? You’re defending them having a monopoly on who gets to advertise to you, nothing more nothing less.