I’m confused - where’s the ban coming from? Here’s an article from a Norwegian site and it doesn’t mention anything about a ban, just the 1 mil kr fine per day and like, NRK is the government run news media here - I somewhat doubt that a government agency would give some American site that sort of news before their own national one
Also the Norwegian government is doing this because they believe that the Irish privacy board is being too slow and not strict enough in regards to Meta
No it didn’t. Citing the link you provided, they forbade behaviour based ad targeting. The agency states that both Instagram and Facebook can continue operating.
it doesn’t mention anything about a ban, just the 1 mil kr fine per day
I’m confused, did you not just describe the consequences for not adhering to the ban? I mean, this is all that a ban is: saying “don’t do the thing. If you do, the consequences are x, y, and z.” Perhaps the consequences aren’t enough in your mind, but it’s still a ban.
A ban means they can’t do the thing. The thing is not allowed.
What you and I are describing are just two possible consequences for a ban.
For example, I’m banned from driving on the opposite side of the road, but that doesn’t mean that I’ll be literally kicked out of the country for doing so.
I think it’s the word “ban” here. When I see ban, I think they’re going to block all of Norway from using Meta. What they’re really doing is making Meta pay a fine for serving overly targeted ads.
I’m for both, by the way. Block Meta and punish them for data hoarding.
I’m confused - where’s the ban coming from? Here’s an article from a Norwegian site and it doesn’t mention anything about a ban, just the 1 mil kr fine per day and like, NRK is the government run news media here - I somewhat doubt that a government agency would give some American site that sort of news before their own national one
Also the Norwegian government is doing this because they believe that the Irish privacy board is being too slow and not strict enough in regards to Meta
The DPA has announced the temporary ban on their own website: https://www.datatilsynet.no/aktuelt/aktuelle-nyheter-2023/midlertidig-forbud-mot-adferdsbasert-markedsforing-pa-facebook-og-instagram/ The justification for the ban seems to be the new decision at the ECJ.
Would be interesting to be a fly on the wall in the coming meetings at EDPB.
No it didn’t. Citing the link you provided, they forbade behaviour based ad targeting. The agency states that both Instagram and Facebook can continue operating.
No it didn’t what?
It will be interesting to see the result of the EDPB meetings. This ban might get extended based on the results and Meta’s actions.
I’m confused, did you not just describe the consequences for not adhering to the ban? I mean, this is all that a ban is: saying “don’t do the thing. If you do, the consequences are x, y, and z.” Perhaps the consequences aren’t enough in your mind, but it’s still a ban.
Wouldn’t a ban mean blocking their services so they’re not accessible? The above just sounds like a penalty.
A ban means they can’t do the thing. The thing is not allowed.
What you and I are describing are just two possible consequences for a ban.
For example, I’m banned from driving on the opposite side of the road, but that doesn’t mean that I’ll be literally kicked out of the country for doing so.
I think it’s the word “ban” here. When I see ban, I think they’re going to block all of Norway from using Meta. What they’re really doing is making Meta pay a fine for serving overly targeted ads.
I’m for both, by the way. Block Meta and punish them for data hoarding.