Vaizey: cookies may not need "prior" consent
By Nicole Kobie
Posted on 25 May 2011 at 09:58
The Government has sparked further confusion over the new cookie regulations, claiming websites may not need to gain "prior consent" before dropping them on users' PCs.
Last night the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) issued an open letter on the UK's implementation of the new EU e-privacy regulations, signed by Culture Minister Ed Vaizey, only a day before the new rules supposedly come into force.
The new laws require websites to ask for user consent when dropping cookies onto computers, except when the cookie is required directly for the service being used - such as online checkouts.
However, Vaizey's letter said the EU rules do not necessarily require "prior consent".
"Crucially, there is no definition as to when that consent may be given, and so it is possible that consent maybe given after or during processing," the letter said.
The DCMS admitted that "in its natural usage 'consent' rarely refers to a permission given after the action," but said that it recognises that it may be "impracticable to obtain consent prior to processing".
Browser settings
The DCMS letter also said the Government was continuing to work with browser makers in the hope that browser settings could be used to show consent.
Previously, The Information Commissioner's Office had said settings in existing browser versions wouldn't be enough to satisfy the rules.
The letter claims the "UK approach" has been to copy the EU regulations word for word, including aspects "which consider that browser settings may give consumers a way to indicate their consent to cookies".
There is no definition as to when that consent may be given, and so it is possible that consent maybe given after or during processing
While it stresses that other technical methods to get consent are not "ruled out", it says the Government will "continue to work with browser manufacturers to see if browsers can be enhanced to meet the requirements of the revised directive".
However, the ICO reiterated today that, in the meantime, browser settings wouldn't be enough to meet the rules. “Browser settings giving individuals more control over cookies will be an important contributor to a solution," said Information Commisioner Christopher Graham. "But the necessary changes to the technology aren’t there yet."
No fines yet
Despite the mixed messages, website owners need not panic, as the ICO said it wouldn't fine sites for the next year for failing to meet the regulations.
The ICO said it will lead by example by putting a banner on its site explaining how it uses cookies, but said not all websites necessarily need do the same.
"Every website is different and prescriptive and universal ‘to-do’ lists would only hinder rather than help businesses to find a solution that works best for them and their customers," he said.
From around the web
Money for Nothing Vaizey says its Free.
Well No Fines that is...
Even if you break the UK Law (about to become UK Law by EU Directive but ICO THINKS "Not just yet").
Its like saying all the Speed Roundals say 70mph but I will slow down next year.
ICO = WoTPM [Waste of Tax Payers Money] and, I believe, a waste of SPACE.
By lenmontieth on 26 May 2011 ![]()
Although they don't tell you exactly what you have to do, the guidelines are pretty clear when you read through them. You can't possibly get permission for some cookies that are essential to the running of the site, so I think it is those that are covered by just telling people about them - others that are not essential and basically for a businesses added benefit, well those you do have to get permission for.
If you google 'cookie consent plugin' there are already some competing solutions out there that businesses are putting into action - some prettier than others, but they all seem to follow the same guidelines in terms of what they're getting permission for.
By JimmyMax on 29 May 2011 ![]()
advertisement
- Laptop bag reviews: nine tested
- Sony VAIO T Series Ultrabook review: first look
- Revealed: the military standards and robots HP uses to test its laptops
- Windows 8: multi-monitors and double standards?
- Why is TalkTalk's year-old porn filter suddenly big news?
- Why are laptop screens so far behind mobiles?
- HP EliteBook Folio review: first look
- The shoebox-sized all-in-one printer
- Forget the Ultrabook: here comes the HP Sleekbook
- HP Spectre XT review: first look
- Why you have to be left in the dark on OS patches
- Is Microsoft mismanaging Windows on ARM?
- Dealing with spam surrogates
- Why 3G broadband can be better and cheaper than ADSL
- Is Twitter bad for business?
- Publishing your email address isn't a security disaster
- Why you'll need a fax machine to develop iOS apps
- Learning to adapt to the mobile web
- Why you shouldn't use WPS on your Wi-Fi network
- Disabled users suffer when software breaks the rules
advertisement
