Yeah but the law didn't invent cookie banners, people who (intentionally mis-)interpreting the law did. Then in the public eye it got reduced to "You need a cookie banner" and people jumped on the bandwagon, because other sides had them so apparently you need to have them too. Many of those cookie banners are factually at odds with current EU law. But hey everything is a cargo cult these days.
Legally the law is just: You have to ask for informed consent that has to be given freely for each purpose. How you ask and how you inform is not defined precisely, except for negative examples what isn't considered informed consent or freely given consent etc.
If someone just clicks "Accept All" that person wasn't informed. So cool that you made them click, but you could also just have left it away, since it didn't give you the thing the law required you to get.
That means real datahogs would probably need to inform people in a many slides long presentation or a feature length film before they could actually get even close to receiving something resembling informed consent. That is ofc totally unpractical and would hurt their business of data-hogging.
Now the EU came at this with the base assumption that prvacy is a right that needs to be protected in a way that it cannot be simply given away without informed free consent. So if it hurts databogs, that is one of the intended side effects.
If my friends Pizza place wants to put ads onto my website that is entirely possible without any tracking he can give me a JPEG or a video and I put it onto my website as static content. Just the current way of advertisements with 300+ third parties would become harder.
Because it’s a poorly designed regulation and there is a group of people who can’t accept that the EU over-regulates and is bad at writing any regulation remotely related to technology.
If a government has trouble complying with the “spirit” (as many people use in argument) of their own regulation then the regulation is poorly designed and not useful.
Legally the law is just: You have to ask for informed consent that has to be given freely for each purpose. How you ask and how you inform is not defined precisely, except for negative examples what isn't considered informed consent or freely given consent etc.
If someone just clicks "Accept All" that person wasn't informed. So cool that you made them click, but you could also just have left it away, since it didn't give you the thing the law required you to get.
That means real datahogs would probably need to inform people in a many slides long presentation or a feature length film before they could actually get even close to receiving something resembling informed consent. That is ofc totally unpractical and would hurt their business of data-hogging.
Now the EU came at this with the base assumption that prvacy is a right that needs to be protected in a way that it cannot be simply given away without informed free consent. So if it hurts databogs, that is one of the intended side effects.
If my friends Pizza place wants to put ads onto my website that is entirely possible without any tracking he can give me a JPEG or a video and I put it onto my website as static content. Just the current way of advertisements with 300+ third parties would become harder.