Another legitimate question is: is the fact that you are willing to pay more a good enough reason to force me to pay more? What if I don't care about privacy as much as you?
That's the real issue here. You can either decide that privacy is a basic right that everyone has and cannot be negotiated away, in which case this law makes sense.
Or you can decide that it's a decision each person makes, and let the market take care of providing options that are more vs. less privacy-respecting.
> You can either decide that privacy is a basic right that everyone has and cannot be negotiated away, in which case this law makes sense.
> Or you can decide that it's a decision each person makes, and let the market take care of providing options that are more vs. less privacy-respecting.
Or, collectively, a group of people can agree on a government that supports privacy protection for goods sold under its remit. Which is what's happened here. I get that it's not popular in the US, but privacy controls are quite popular in Europe, and the EU is in this case following the mood of its people.
Yes, "a group of people" acting through the government to support privacy protection is what my first sentence meant. Clearly that's what's happened.
Not sure why you phrase it "or"? I think we agree that that's one sensible approach to take (treating it as a basic right that can't be negotiated away, much like other things).
That's the real issue here. You can either decide that privacy is a basic right that everyone has and cannot be negotiated away, in which case this law makes sense.
Or you can decide that it's a decision each person makes, and let the market take care of providing options that are more vs. less privacy-respecting.