Ticking time-bomb in the EDPB Guidelines on consent?

An old issue each privacy pro learnt by heart: “risk of negative consequences (e.g. substantial extra costs)” for data subject = no freely-given consent. 

Substantial. But what if extra costs are not substantial? What if, say, 10$ turns into 11$ if you refuse to consent? Is it ok? 

At leats, German watchdog seems to say yes. Some privacy pros agree (see below).

One can say that I am picky, indeed, 1$ or even 10$ surcharge will unlikely lead to bankruptcy. But what will happen if this practice becomes commonplace? Right, data subject will overpay every time he/she is requested to give consent. 1$ per one requested consent will turn into 10$ per ten requests. How long could that ‘receipt’ be a year after? 5 years after?

You got to the crux of the matter. While EDPB considers substantiality in the context of a one-off consent request, it does not address the aftermaths when overcharging becomes a rule.


One Reply to “Ticking time-bomb in the EDPB Guidelines on consent?”

  1. This is not all together a surprise. I remember speaking on this in 2016 – personal data will become a marketable product for THE DATA SUBJECT. Privacy is a human right, as is the right to CHOICE. However, where choice comes into play when you have no money and will sell your personal data to get that extra chicken in your groceries. Nevertheless, I like the idea that when I provide consent I get paid, whereas today I don’t. It does reinforce the fact that my personal data belongs to me nobody else at a minimum.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.