John, respectfully disagree. Importantly, GDPR never mentions 1st vs 3rd parties. consent/LI is tied to purpose. much of google's purposes are in jeopardy without ability to prove value to user (needs to be freely given). Stay tuned, some related analysis. https://digitalcontentnext.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/DCN-ePrivacy-White-Paper-Final.pdf …
-
-
-
I think we're arguing the same thing. There's a long road ahead to litigate these finer points. Who has the resources and power to define outcomes here?
-
maybe. the regulations regardless of G/FB/IAB lobbying were fairly baked years ago and significance guidance has been provided. G/FB can't do what they've been doing for years, weakens their moats. it never came up at
@tkawaja conference private action is material here. -
I agree that this opens a new offensive angle toward weakening their moats, however, I also would argue it also gives them a strong hand defending their moats - because when it starts heading toward case law, those with the most lawyers win.
-
again, fair. but they currently capture 85-90% of the growth going on 3 years. do you think they would rather have yesterday or today in terms of GDPR? it also shines a light on the source of dominance while it adds friction to their data supply chain. https://digitalcontentnext.org/blog/2018/05/23/being-big-and-behaving-badly/ …pic.twitter.com/lEy8Vyq8bL
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
it may not be good for Google Facebook, etc, but they are hardly innovative
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
it will help innovators whose business models don't rely on selling personal information
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.