Almost entire EU now violating Brussels cookie privacy law

Steelie Neelie threatens 'necessary measures'


The deadline for the implementation of a European privacy law on cookies passed with a whimper at midnight last night, after just two Member States issued a full notification to Brussels.

Meanwhile, 19 of the 27-bloc countries that make up the European Union ignored the 25 May deadline on implementing the full, or indeed partial, set of measures laid out in the revised legislation for the e-Privacy Directive.

At the end of yesterday, only Estonia and Denmark had notified the Commission, with officials in those states confirming that they had transposed all of the EC measures on internet cookies into their national law.

The UK, France, Slovenia, Luxembourg, Latvia and Lithuania all offered the Commission partial notifications, even though Brussels' officials had made it clear that implementation of all the measures was required from each member state.

Finland is also expected to implement all parts of the 2009 legislation. But it hasn't notified the EC yet.

The European privacy law came into force this morning requiring websites within the EU to obtain a visitor's consent to install a cookie in their browser. But readers would be forgiven for thinking little has changed online today.

Indeed, the UK government effectively freed up web owners in Britain from the burden of implementing the changes for one year, after the Information Commissioner, Christopher Graham – whose office is tasked with enforcing the law – confirmed yesterday that no action would be immediately taken against companies that ignored the rules.

"We're giving businesses and organisations up to one year to get their house in order," he said yesterday.

The Register asked Brussels spokesman Jonathan Todd to explain what the lack of interest in the privacy law meant for the EU.

"That a large number of Member States have failed to fulfil their obligations to meet a deadline that they themselves had set," he said.

"For its part, the Commission may open infringement proceedings against the Member States in question as a matter of urgency."

He pointed out that Europe's digital agenda Commissioner Neelie Kroes said earlier this week that she would "take the measures necessary to fix that situation vis-à-vis Member States and telecoms operators".

But the warning appeared to have been largely ignored, leaving many website businesses perplexed by the new rules.

As for the detail missing from the UK's submission to the Commission, Todd told us that "they have notified everything except the law giving the necessary new powers to Ofcom – we know that they have adopted this law but they have not yet notified it (we presume they will imminently)."

Blighty's communications minister Ed Vaizey said earlier this week that his government department was talking to browser vendors to work out a "technical solution" via a browser setting.

Some privacy advocates claimed that Vaizey was appeasing advertisers by shying away from implementing an effective mechanism that would allow web surfers to consent to their online movements being tracked. ®

Similar topics


Other stories you might like

  • Prisons transcribe private phone calls with inmates using speech-to-text AI

    Plus: A drug designed by machine learning algorithms to treat liver disease reaches human clinical trials and more

    In brief Prisons around the US are installing AI speech-to-text models to automatically transcribe conversations with inmates during their phone calls.

    A series of contracts and emails from eight different states revealed how Verus, an AI application developed by LEO Technologies and based on a speech-to-text system offered by Amazon, was used to eavesdrop on prisoners’ phone calls.

    In a sales pitch, LEO’s CEO James Sexton told officials working for a jail in Cook County, Illinois, that one of its customers in Calhoun County, Alabama, uses the software to protect prisons from getting sued, according to an investigation by the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

    Continue reading
  • Battlefield 2042: Please don't be the death knell of the franchise, please don't be the death knell of the franchise

    Another terrible launch, but DICE is already working on improvements

    The RPG Greetings, traveller, and welcome back to The Register Plays Games, our monthly gaming column. Since the last edition on New World, we hit level cap and the "endgame". Around this time, item duping exploits became rife and every attempt Amazon Games made to fix it just broke something else. The post-level 60 "watermark" system for gear drops is also infuriating and tedious, but not something we were able to address in the column. So bear these things in mind if you were ever tempted. On that note, it's time to look at another newly released shit show – Battlefield 2042.

    I wanted to love Battlefield 2042, I really did. After the bum note of the first-person shooter (FPS) franchise's return to Second World War theatres with Battlefield V (2018), I stupidly assumed the next entry from EA-owned Swedish developer DICE would be a return to form. I was wrong.

    The multiplayer military FPS market is dominated by two forces: Activision's Call of Duty (COD) series and EA's Battlefield. Fans of each franchise are loyal to the point of zealotry with little crossover between player bases. Here's where I stand: COD jumped the shark with Modern Warfare 2 in 2009. It's flip-flopped from WW2 to present-day combat and back again, tried sci-fi, and even the Battle Royale trend with the free-to-play Call of Duty: Warzone (2020), which has been thoroughly ruined by hackers and developer inaction.

    Continue reading
  • American diplomats' iPhones reportedly compromised by NSO Group intrusion software

    Reuters claims nine State Department employees outside the US had their devices hacked

    The Apple iPhones of at least nine US State Department officials were compromised by an unidentified entity using NSO Group's Pegasus spyware, according to a report published Friday by Reuters.

    NSO Group in an email to The Register said it has blocked an unnamed customers' access to its system upon receiving an inquiry about the incident but has yet to confirm whether its software was involved.

    "Once the inquiry was received, and before any investigation under our compliance policy, we have decided to immediately terminate relevant customers’ access to the system, due to the severity of the allegations," an NSO spokesperson told The Register in an email. "To this point, we haven’t received any information nor the phone numbers, nor any indication that NSO’s tools were used in this case."

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021