Which is why I had hoped the EU would ban all forms of fingerprinting and non-essential data tracking. But they somehow got lobbied into selecting cookies as the only possible mechanism that can be used, leaving ample room to track using other methods.
The European Commission has fined Apple over €1.8 billion for abusing its dominant position on the market for the distribution of music streaming apps to iPhone and iPad users (‘iOS users’) through its App Store
If you have reason to believe they are, you explain that reasoning to a court and if the reasoning is sufficiently persuasive the company can be compelled to provide internal information that could show whatever is going on.
Hiding this information or destroying it typically carries personal penalties for the individuals involved in it’s destruction, as well as itself being evidence against the organization. “If your company didn’t collect this information, why are four IT administrators and their manager serving 10 years in prison for intentionally deleting relevant business records?”
Not sure how to effectively do that, but I reckon it would be no different than the cookie mess today. Which unfortunately is, hardly ever. The big GDPR related fines can still apply. Let’s say a data set is leaked that includes tracking data that was not necessary for the service to have, then the company can receive a hefty fine. As long as the fine is larger than the reward, it might not be worth it for the company to track you anymore.
Which is why I had hoped the EU would ban all forms of fingerprinting and non-essential data tracking. But they somehow got lobbied into selecting cookies as the only possible mechanism that can be used, leaving ample room to track using other methods.
How would that even be enforced?
same way other regulations are enforced: fines
That might work if the fine was say $1.5 B
EU knows how to get it done
God bless those European MF’rs
How do you prove they’re doing it?
If you have reason to believe they are, you explain that reasoning to a court and if the reasoning is sufficiently persuasive the company can be compelled to provide internal information that could show whatever is going on.
Hiding this information or destroying it typically carries personal penalties for the individuals involved in it’s destruction, as well as itself being evidence against the organization. “If your company didn’t collect this information, why are four IT administrators and their manager serving 10 years in prison for intentionally deleting relevant business records?”
The courts are allowed to go through your stuff.
They’re making money aren’t they? They have to be doing something weird.
Investigation, witnesses, gather evidence, build a case and present the evidence. Same as any other thing.
I don’t get why this would be harder to prove than other things?
Not sure how to effectively do that, but I reckon it would be no different than the cookie mess today. Which unfortunately is, hardly ever. The big GDPR related fines can still apply. Let’s say a data set is leaked that includes tracking data that was not necessary for the service to have, then the company can receive a hefty fine. As long as the fine is larger than the reward, it might not be worth it for the company to track you anymore.