THE END OF ONLINE BEHAVIOURAL ADVERTISING
summary
Panel argues online behavioural advertising is legally and economically precarious: NOYB complaints plus GDPR and EDPB orders challenge Meta’s switch to contract and legitimate‑interest bases, and courts probe consent frameworks — CJEU case C 184/20 expands sensitive data; practical detail: ad stacks show 100 partners in first layer and 4,000 in the second, making specific informed consent impossible; DSA/DMA/AI Act add bans (minors, special categories) and auditing, while evidence suggests behavioural targeting often fails (Goodhart effect) and LLMs amplify risks.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (9)
- 0:00Introduction
- 13:37GDPR vs Meta's model
- 25:10DSA and AI Act impact
- 31:00GDPR enforcement review
- 42:10Prohibition of behavioral data
- 52:58Future of online ads
- 1:05:39Q&A on GDPR
- 1:17:07Closing remarks
- 1:38:50Conference wrap-up
related talks
01h 02mThe GDPR and New Technologies: Enough, or do we need more?
01h 06mDARK BY DESIGN: REGULATING MANIPULATION IN ONLINE ENVIRONMENTS
01h 10mMANIPULATIVE DESIGN PRACTICES ONLINE: POLICY SOLUTIONS FOR THE EU AND THE US
01h 21mSimplification for Whom? Unpacking the Consumer Impact of the Digital Omnibus.
36mCollaborative paths to privacy enhancing advertising
01h 12mEmerging Patterns in EU Digital Regulation
01h 07mThe great data race ...
28mAdtech Privacy Risk: Increasing Regulation and Enforcement