Some websites have started introducing paywalls which can be lifted with data rather than cash.

It is an increasingly common message from websites: browse for free - if you allow us to track your data and target you with personalised ads - if you don’t, hand over some cash.

The model is known as “consent or pay” and, while it may be becoming increasingly common, questions remain over whether it is ethical or even legal.

The UK data regulator, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has launched a consultation on the practice - it will report its findings later this year.

“In principle, data protection law does not prohibit business models that involve ‘consent or pay,’” the ICO says on its website.

  • superkret@feddit.orgEnglish
    1·
    2 months ago

    Taken to its logical conclusion, that would mean no more search engines, video or image hosting sites, or actually any websites that aren’t tied to a paid service, financed by taxes or donations, or provided by hobbyists as a pastime.

      • superkret@feddit.orgEnglish
        1·
        2 months ago

        Web services require someone’s work, time, and resources. That someone needs to eat.
        The question boils down to: Who provides that someone with the means to live?

        • girlfreddy@lemmy.caOPEnglish
          7·
          2 months ago

          I have zero problem paying an actual creator for their stuff. I do have an issue with paying exorbitant prices (whether dollars, ads or my data) to a billion dollar company who is only in it for the money.

    • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      5·
      2 months ago

      I’m perfectly fine with almost all of the commercial web disappearing, except the stuff that actually justifies a price tag, and it mostly being hobbyist content.

      But that’s really not the issue. Tracking users across sites should not be legal, and should not be possible to consent to.