STANDARD FOR CONSENT: STILL A DREAM OR A SOON-TO-BE REALITY?
summary
Regulators and auditors report concrete failures: the IAB TCF used by 1,400+ sites bundles vague purposes like “develop products,” letting vendors claim consent or legitimate interest interchangeably; the Norwegian decision on Grindr and CNIL fines for Google/Amazon show enforcement is already happening. Technical realities matter: Firebase/Google Analytics usually require consent, CMPs drop many third‑party cookies, and double‑click or deferred‑JS share buttons are viable workarounds that avoid preloading trackers. Policymakers push human‑readable standard purposes and layered, auditable mappings to legal bases.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (5)
- 0:00Start
- 1:48Detection of Tracking Technologies
- 24:28Third Requirement Legitimacy
- 41:31The Purpose Limitation Principle
- 1:03:23Neutral Design Patterns
related talks
16mWhy Consent Fails in Practice: Lessons from Web Measurement Studies
01h 16mUsers' control over their data: is prior consent the best way to monitor.
01h 19mEffective Transparency and User Controls: Are We Close to a Breakthrough?
05mInformed Consent: Are your participants aware of what they share
01h 13mAfter the Omnibus: Consent or Red Lights?
01h 15mExploring the lands of GDPR, DSA and DMA: Using the consent umbrella when it’s raining with data
30mAddressing the Privacy Paradox – Setting Consent & Preference Management Into Practice
05mA Fait Accompli? An Empirical Study into the Absence of Consent to Third-Party Tracking