Saw this today and now I'm reconsidering if Boost is right for me. I'm really hoping this is shitty boiler plate that was accidentally copied and over looked because that is some bullshit to say "unless we decide we want to use your personal data for whatever we want".
I know "legitimate interest" is a phrase from the cookies law but there is no legitimate interest justification for this. My data is my data and I decide who has a legitimate interest in it so advertisers can fuck off, as can Boost if this the direction it's going.
Edit to say this blew up. I didn't realise I was kicking as big a hornet's nest and haven't read all the comments yet.
To be clear, what I don't like about this and other provisions in the terms is the language and implications around data use. I've no problem with ads being shown - I want developers to get paid for the work they do and that makes it possible for users to have "free" access to software if they can't afford to purchase.
I also want to add the response from Boost's dev below to make sure it's visible. You'll see that it is boilerplate but required by Google and was present in Boost for reddit. I just hadn't seen it because I purchased it immediately based on a recommendation. It doesn't make me happy about it but does remove some doubts I was having about the direction Boost is heading.
I will be purchasing the app to support the dev because I do like Boost but I understand not everyone can afford everything so you'll see some other suggestions in the comments below that don't have any ads if you're not happy with the free version and ads with their associated loss of data privacy.
Dev here.
The dialog and its content is not created by me, it is a standard solution from Google to comply with GDPR and other laws. More info here: https://support.google.com/admob/answer/10114014?hl=en
The consent dialog is also required by Google AdMob to show ads, and it is shown when the ad network is initialized.
When the app launches, first it checks for the remove ads purchase, and if it is not present, it will initialize the ads sdk. The ad network is not initialized if the remove ads purchase is detected.
Boost for Reddit was using the very same ad networks and consent dialog.
legitimate interest is a shitty data privacy loophole
Hi could you give me your name, address, social security number, browser history, sickness history, political affiliation, sexual orientation, pay grade please π₯Ί
I have a legitimate interest! It's identity theft
TIL that some people have identity theft as a hobby
You never just buy a yacht for yourself in someone elseβs name as a gift for yourself to reward yourself for finally learning that new skill?
I only subscribe to porn sites. As a hobby, of course
It's a clause within GDPR which is usually misinterpreted and sometimes (as is most probably the case here) abused.
Ok, that is informative. Without that specific context, that message is utterly empty and useless.
Of course, it still feels weird, that "legitimate interest" seems a subjective term and maybe they could have found some better phrasing to reflect this sentiment...
From the dev has said, it sounds like it's Google's language, not his. So he probably doesn't have any control over the phrasing.
Right, I was thinking not the developer, not the ad network, but all the way back to the wording of GDPR.
In fact, it feels like an ad network cannot have a "legitimate interest" in personal information of someone who opts out. If they count targeted advertising without consent as "legitimate interest", seems like GPDR is significantly less useful.
Well the "loophole" exists for a reason.
For example my company requires the position and some identifier of people to do what people use our system for (tracking logistics units, and there is an option to do that via a mobile app for smallest clients not owning dedicated hardware). That's what legitimate interest is about. Or well, is supposed to be about. Some data processing is the point of some applications, and hence they would naturally not be usable without processing that personal data.
True, should have clarified - itβs something that is abused and treated as a loophole by shitty companies.
wouldnt that fall under "essential cookies/data" or something like that? which is usually presented separately from "legitimate interest" in these forms and rightfully cant be turned off
It isn't. Just as declaring yourself a sovereign citizen isn't a loophole for whatever idiots claim it's a loophole for, declaring illegitimate use legitimate isn't a loophole.
Actual examples for legitimate use: Storing someone's address if he wants to send you something, using someone's IP-address to serve him data while he's on your site.... If it's necessary it's legitimate.
Deutsche Bahn is being sued right now just because of this, here's the initiative that is suing them: https://digitalcourage.de/
Send a few bucks their way instead of spreading false information on the Internet.
What if I determine that selling user data is necessary to my business? Then it falls under legitimate interest, right? I guess what Iβm asking is how using the legitimate interest label is any different?