• Nyfure@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    1 year ago

    You dont need a cookie banner if you dont want to invasively track the users.
    So its really the fault of the websites for wanting to use categories of cookies which do require a banner (ad and tracking).

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      Indeed

      Plenty of websites that don’t have a cookie banner like Wikipedia and Lemmy. And both of them are completely legal.

      It is only after the cookie banner that we now know how many websites are actually selling our data, turns out it is the grand majority of them.

      • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yup. What most people do not get. Wikipedia, Lemmy and others only need consent when they start processing personal data, like in the registration form.

        Clicking “agree” on a banner on first visit is like creating an account with IP address acting like a login.

      • Nyfure@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, selling would also not be allowed via a cookie banner as the cookie banner doesnt address that.
        GDPR already doesnt allow usage of PII which you cannot find legitimate reasons for. Just selling PII is never allowed as you will not find a legitimate reason for doing so.
        But the cookie banner can allow more invasive tracking via setting tracking cookies which can be covered under legitimate interest for the operator of the website themselves.