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.
Tis is not not ok, actually. I'm a software dev for a European company. I'm briefed by our lawyers.
"Legitimate use" isn't just a phrase from cookie law, it has a very specific meaning.
What's legitimate use? Well, any data I necessarily have to store for our business relation I can store. For as long as I need it. For example: You want me to send you something? Gonna need to store your address. After I sent the package I don't have any need for your address any more so I'd need your explicit consent to store it longer.
Another example for what is considered personal data: IP addresses. Which I store for as long as you watch my site, so that would be another example for a legitimate reason to store personal data.
Still I don't get why they display this banner. To my knowledge it's not necessary to inform the user about storage for legitimate reasons.
All that said, there's plenty of examples of companies illegitimately storing personal data, google is a good example they were sued only yesterday (fitbit)
This is useful insight but I think it's important to remember that, as messed up as it sounds, different companies and their lawyers will interpret laws differently. It will be a risk vs reward calculation for each company. They won't consider if it's illegal or not, they'll consider whether they're likely to be prosecuted, what the fines would be, what the reputational damage would be, whether they have more lawyers than the government of a moderately sized country etc.
I probably agree with the interpretation you've given and would like the governments to go after companies that think otherwise but that sadly isn't how it works.
Well, the authorities may be sluggish at best, but still your stance on this seems rather uninformed.
You should read up on noyb.eu 's work, and the lawsuits they fought. The max. fines for GDPR-violations is 4% of a company's worldwide annual turnover, that's something companies are taking very seriously, I know because I deal with it on a daily basis.
There's still going to be companies who try to bend the law to their will, but they keep losing in front of courts.