The cookie consent wall is only a solution for sites willing to drop third-party cookies.
You can still require anything regarding your own website to access it, including cookies, as long as those are needed for the correct functioning of your website.
What this clarifies is that you can longer restrict your website access to people "consenting" to have tens of other companies dropping cookies on them.
> What this clarifies is that you can longer restrict your website access to people "consenting" to have tens of other companies dropping cookies on them.
This is the same thing as forcing a religious baker to make a statement cakes that violate their religion. If you don't like how a site works don't fucking visit it! Every modern browser has a setting to block third party cookies as well. Forcing web site owners to serve customers who don't like the business model of the site is Orwellian.
There a ton of things you can't ask as payment for your services. It may be physical (let's say body parts), or conceptual (let's say the user freedom of speech). Those things can't be enforced by any contract, however you want to write them, and even if you somehow got someone to sign on it, it would still be void.
In the EU, we deemed suitable to add "privacy" to the list of things you can't legally ask a payment for when providing a service in the form of a website.
That's it. Maybe that's shocking for you, but it's not for me, it's not for the people I voted for, and apparently it's not for quite a number of people and so, it passed.
If you don't like how the law works, well, don't live in the EU ? You can find a lot of countries where this is isn't a consideration, and that may suit you better. Otherwise, well, you've been pwned by democracy. Tough luck !
(I won't begin to adress your comparison with the baker, because, well, I can't begin to make sense of it.)
>If you don't like how the law works, well, don't live in the EU ? You can find a lot of countries where this is isn't a consideration, and that may suit you better. Otherwise, well, you've been pwned by democracy. Tough luck !
Democracy? The commission doesn't get elected. The commission is the one to create the laws. Furthermore, most of the voting in the Parliament is done by people not even in my own country. This means that they don't have to care about what I want at all, as my vote has zero effect on them. And if the EU keeps going the way it is then I'd definitely like to get out, because the only thing the EU does is legislate while the bloc's economy has been doing poorly.
Commission (leaders of which are selected by your government that you presumably voted for) makes a draft.
Commission consults widely (usually online consultation) and all national ministries comment.
Commission redrafts and sends to parliament and council.
In the council your government has (most of the time) veto power.
In the parliament your and other countries delegates vote on it.
Then parliament (people's representatives) and council (national government representatives) sit together, find the middle ground of a final draft.
Parliament and council then each do a final vote.
Depending on the exact type of legal document it either enters into force right away or your national administration, parliament and government create their own national version of it conform to the EU document and make that a national law.
That's a pretty heavy process but it's just wrong to say that the voters don't have influence. National governments and delegates both can say no.
Now is the parliament representative just because people are not from just one country? Is your national parliament representative even if there are people from different regions/cities/...? Is your major democratically elected just because that other suburb also got to vote? That's just an absurd position.
The commission is indirectly elected. Your democratically elected leaders propose the commission, i.e. the Council of the European Union [0]. I guess in US terms it could be thought of as more similar to the senate?
After being proposed they are then democratically confirmed by the parliament which you directly elect.
the page loads without any tracking cookies etc...
on that page there is a login/register button..
registration processes gets consent for any personal information storage and processing..
where do you see the issue? not tracking people and cookie consent etc. only ever seem to be an issue if you are trying to silently track people, i have not seen any issues when you actually genuinely seek consent
This seems like a slippery slope situation. What if you require people to login, signup, or pay to access your content?
There is certainly some sites out there that reasonably require this. How do we define the boundary between the two?