Post AbaldwcvPYSOWA8Ad6 by thatprivacyguy@eupolicy.social
 (DIR) More posts by thatprivacyguy@eupolicy.social
 (DIR) Post #AbaldsYAZIHBsFsJf6 by thatprivacyguy@eupolicy.social
       2023-11-08T08:13:29Z
       
       0 likes, 1 repeats
       
       Just want to point out that I wasn't interviewed for this article so the quotes are second hand at best and I have not mentioned #GDPR in relation to this matter.Article is jumping on the back of other articles I did interview for and then adding a bunch of crap I never said...https://innovationorigins.com/en/youtubes-ad-blocker-clash-a-legal-quandary-in-europe/#privacy #adblocking
       
 (DIR) Post #AbaldujET8JWd94BBQ by thatprivacyguy@eupolicy.social
       2023-11-08T08:51:11Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       It is important to note that if GDPR was the primary law here it would be much less helpful as YouTube would likely be able to argue using the Legitimate Interest legal basis.This is precisely why the EU Parliament have said there will not be a legitimate interest legal basis under the ePrivacy Regulation (and why there isn't under the ePrivacy Directive) because interference with our private sphere (what we do in our home or on our own devices) is a huge risk to fundamental rights.#privacy
       
 (DIR) Post #AbaldwcvPYSOWA8Ad6 by thatprivacyguy@eupolicy.social
       2023-11-08T08:59:36Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       Of course that doesn't mean their balancing test for LI would go in their favour (it wouldn't) but it would give them some wriggle room for argument - whereas there is zero argument available to them under ePrivacy as the only legal basis is consent.