• Mike@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    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.

    • easily3667@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      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.

      • Mike@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        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.

        • easily3667@lemmus.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          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.

          • Mike@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            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.

    • AntelopeRoom@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      What law was broken? The court didn’t seem able to even articulate it. You can’t either.

      • Mike@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        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.