liljimContact Info / Websites
- AIM
- liljimnewgrounds
Newgrounds DOT Com
Friend's WebsiteEntry #24
So, as of May 26 2012, European Law now dictates that websites in the UK should make it very abundant to users that if they're using cookies in any shape or form on said websites, to notify their users that they're doing so.
The common pattern so far has to been to display an in-page popup/popin, explaining the changes. What happens when you accept this great news, and how do the websites remember your choice? That'd be a cookie, then.
Cookies are not the devil and can contain all sorts of trivial and sometimes sensitive information, but they are more commonly used for good than bad.
I'm not going to go into detail, but for example, if you show an interest while online shopping on popular websites for "televisions", that site might then present you with suggestions of popular televisions on subsequent visits.
Third party advertising companies might use them to tell their servers that you have already seen one ad they have, and to display another next time they show you one of their ads.
THE most laughable though, when it comes to comments I have seen on social media websites on this matter are along the lines of "This is a good move, I hate being spied on". The majority of those people making the comments have more than likely checked the "remember me" option on those websites, so they don't have to log in each time they come back to their favoured site. I wonder how they're remembered. Oh yeah, that'd be a cookie, then.
It's not clear to me as a citizen of the UK (and European Union) when I might be in breach of this law, either. For example - let's say I own a business based in the UK and I have a website. What happens if the website I have is registered to a domain name service outside of Europe and the website is also hosted on server(s) outside of Europe? What happens if the domain name service I use is IN Europe, but the site's content is hosted outside of Europe?
Also, many website owners may not know they are in breach of this law, whether or not they're explicitly setting any cookies themselves. Will sites using google analytics need to declare that they're using cookies? Who knows.
Will this drive companies in the UK from having their content hosted on servers in the UK? Again, who knows. Can't be a good thing shoving these prompts down peoples' faces, though - and those already paranoid about blowing up their computer because they're using the Internet aren't going to be reassured by any of this. Most decent browsers allow the user to control what cookies are set, leave that choice in their hands.
Anyway, this trumps all of what I've written so far - the committee that decided this was a good idea fail to comply with their own law. Awesome.
Further reading:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18206810
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17745938
Can't be bothered to go any further back than that. Oh and if you're wondering what cookies get set on those pages on accepting cookies, the name is ckns_policy if you want to remove it.
Punishment for websites in the UK that fail to comply with this law carries a maximum fine of 500,000.00 GBP = 781,966.28 USD (as of writing). Nice.
- 23 comments
Comments
You must be logged in to comment on this post.
3/25/13
I will find a way around this, I always do.
9/15/12
SUPERCOOKIE!
8/15/12
@Boss Yeah, the internet is like the wild west. The sad thing is, like the Wild West I honestly think it's inevitable that it's going to be governed more and more against our will at some point the future. I guess we'll just have to keep our memories of an uncensored and free internet.
7/29/12
It's also time and money consuming, making such stupid laws, that and the law itself is time consuming, for Internet visitors, and site developers.
7/10/12
people are sick to death of being plagued by ad's , now i can understand that websites that offer free services need ad revenue in order to service , but some just go waaaaay over board
before i carefully controlled what cookies i enable , i had adds following me around, popping up from every which way and pretty much acting like malware , in the sense that they slowed me down
then i realized that there was a great little tool called add block , and not only that, but i went and committed myself to learning exactly what cookie did what
and now, i'm happy and ad free
a website doesn't need 750,000 ads to survive
all that being said, to pass a law and require companies to do that is ridiculous
the typical everyday computer user will just see that pop up and automatically click "continue" and move on with their internet business without reading much
7/4/12
the internet is like the wild west n shit fuck tha police
7/1/12
The government really has no idea about the internet to be honest. This goes with all this horrible blocking business of torrent sites and classifying drawn art which doesnt even contain children as child porn.
6/20/12
mr jim!
5/31/12
What makes me laugh is that the government themselves didn't bother to comply with the law:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18090118
5/30/12
I just block all that shit. It does seem a bit like they want to dog your ass, but I can't see anyone being charged that amount of money for not typing in a disclaimer or something. Is it that morally agonizing having to declare shoving all these unwanted pop ups (and occasionally viruses) down peoples throats more than doing so in the first place?
I'm not sure why is that law required anyways. Google is already up everyone's ass. These sheeple are more willing to share in their information with those big companies right? So why not make bad worse?
5/30/12
This is one of the few times the U.K. government got something right; people should be aware of cookies; more awareness regarding one's privacy is always a good thing.
Not everyone is as computer savvy as the I.T. literate crowd on newgrounds, so this policy will ensure those people understand what they're getting into when they log onto a website, even if it's something as commonplace as a "cookie".
The fine is fucking ridiculous though...
Absolute horse shit.
To clarify what I mean by this - in terms of data that's collected, it's better to do it transparently. Every single time you go to a market, you can more or less bet that there's someone watching your purchasing habits - not for malicious purposes, but to observe what's selling so that they can get more of that stock and start selling more of it.
You wouldn't expect them to come screaming up to your face telling you that's what they're doing and this law is very similar to that. You're just a stat when it comes to using cookies in this way (which is one of many), not a person.
5/30/12
The amount of ridicule one should pour over politicians whenever they open their mouth to spurt something tech-related is nigh infinite.
Germany has/had some kind of . . . police trojan I'd say. It's so crappy programmed that it was found within a day of it's first employment and made usless by day two. That's what you get for not paying your money, having no god damn clue what your doing whatsoever and only care for being reellectedd. Then again - it was only in Bavaria so who cares ^^. The oppinion of the politicians is like "So they've got something against the house search of their PC? Then they souldn't open the door."
That speakes volumes for their grasp of the subject.
5/29/12
I'm slightly confused - does this only apply to the UK, or does it apply to the union as a whole?
Because this is shit, and since I'm in the midst of setting up a website I must admit it puts me slightly on edge. If this law actually gets enforced I'll probably just set up some retarded "view content at own discretion" page like they do with porn or R-rated trailers, but that would be crappy solution.
http://gigaom.com/europe/cookie-l aw-explainer/
Read that (yes, it does apply to you, but for some bizarre reason the UK is first on the hit-list). The rest of this isn't directed at you...
My points about where content is located and what not still stand - if you actually read the documentation it's so ambiguous, even I could argue my way through court without any aide on most of this stuff. It really is a pathetic law.
5/29/12
Seems they were trying to look at the cookie issue as too black-and-white, i.e. big companies vs the little people. Obviously it goes much deeper than that.
5/29/12
(Need -to hear- what I'd advise in this situation....)
5/29/12
I would not need to be ordered to tell people about the niceties of data exchange on my website. I would just tell them, and remind them of the option to shut down the exchange if they fear a backlash or virus. Is this just an excuse to impose fines and meddle with someone's affairs? That's exactly what it is. But you don't need what I would advise in this situation....
5/29/12
You wouldn't let a politician build your car, or instruct a surgeon while they were operating ... I don't understand how they possibly believe they have any right to manipulate something they don't understand.
5/29/12
They should just call cookies "vegetables" that way we can understand them better.
5/29/12
People are so uneducated about the internet that it's sickening.
Compile this current law with those SOPA, PIPA, and other laws out there and it shows that the current government is to old to know/keep up with current technology.
5/29/12
But surely, the world's leaders have always been very up to date.
5/29/12
That's the way the cookie crumbles.
5/29/12
Ive always hated that they were called 'cookies' i love cookies. why ruin that word. They coulda called it anything. Tracking beacon, eartag, etc
5/29/12
Hey, liljim, respond to this with an overused pun that people will cringe at.