• Resolved bosendorfer

    (@bosendorfer)


    Hi,
    it would be very useful given the new directives we have here in Italy and which will probably also be widespread in the rest of Europe, that by clicking on the placeholder the content is not directly enabled and the selection of marketing cookies takes place. Instead of this behavior it would be more compliant with what the directive requires if clicking in the placeholder the banner of choice is opened. If it were possible the text in the placeholder, which I see is already customizable, could be something like: click to open the banner and select the marketing cookies to enable the content.
    Could you php expert insert a function of that type or provide us with a code to insert into function.php that let something like this happen?

    It’s just a question without any pretense of course… you never know you already have the solution for this so I try to ask ??

    Best regards

    Raf

    • This topic was modified 3 years, 11 months ago by bosendorfer.
Viewing 7 replies - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • Plugin Contributor Leon Wimmenhoeve

    (@leonwimmenhoeve)

    Hi @bosendorfer,

    You could configure such a function using Complianz shortcodes, such as [cmplz-revoke-link]. For a complete list of used shortcodes, see this article: https://complianz.io/used-shortcodes-by-complianz/

    From a legal and technical point of view, I don’t see why your suggestion would be preferable. Can you explain why you prefer this option?

    Kind regards,
    Leon

    Thread Starter bosendorfer

    (@bosendorfer)

    Hi @leonwimmenhoeve,

    Thanks for the reply.
    Of course, the system in place is more convenient, the user click only once and the content is activated. But in the directives it is expressly required that everything must take place within a defined context, and the defined context is the banner of choice.
    I took a look at the shortcodes page, which I already know because I used the shortcodes in the document that I prepared manually, but in this case I don’t understand how I can apply it in the context of which I speak. I tried to insert the shortcode in the “Blocked content text” string but obviously it doesn’t work.
    Can you kindly clarify how do you think I can achieve that result with the shortcode?
    As always, thank you very much for the effort.

    Best regards

    Raf

    Plugin Contributor Mathieu Paapst

    (@paapst)

    Hi @bosendorfer,
    I can’t answer your technical question about shortcodes, but I would like to respond to your question about the new directives.
    Complianz and the WordPress Core-Privacy community members always follow and discuss the latest developments regarding the ePrivacy Directive and the draft of the ePrivacy Regulation. If there is any legal need to change the current way the consent is being asked, I can assure you that it will be implemented in the GDPR region. In the current system, the user is first offered the banner of choice, and information about the cookies and services. At the same time, video content is being blocked and replaced by a privacy-friendly placeholder. Only under the circumstance that the user has denied the consent for marketing/tracking (on the banner of choice), he/she is also being presented with the direct opportunity (on the placeholder) to change their choice. That is convenient for the user, and we think also allowed within the context of the ePrivacy Directive and the GDPR. If the user wants to reread the already given information about the cookies and services, they can reopen the banner of choice with the button on the page’s bottom. They can then read the cookie policy text that also contains the possibility to give consent to marketing/tracking.

    Kind regards,
    Mathieu

    Thread Starter bosendorfer

    (@bosendorfer)

    Hi @paapst,

    Sorry for delay in replying but it has been a busy day.
    I am creating a site with the collaboration of a lawyer who deals exclusively with privacy.
    It should be noted that on November 22 new directives came out and will come into force in the coming months.

    With reference to your pulgin, the lawyer raised two problems to me.

    The first is the subject of this thread.
    In short, decisions must be made in a clear and exclusive environment, in this case the banner and the cookie policy, and not fragmented in different places on the site.
    We found a compromise by writing something in the placeholder that sounds like: “by clicking here you authorize us to enable Marketing Cookies, as per Cookie Policy, necessary to view the content”.
    But it would have been preferable that by clicking on the place holder the banner would open and the user would click there to authorize marketing cookie.

    The second thing is that according to the new directives the user must be able to close the banner without making choices and without having to waste time reading the content.
    I am writing to you verbatim what the directive says in this case so that you can understand better (google transladed, sorry).

    If the user chooses, as it is in his full availability, to keep those
    default settings and therefore not to give your consent to the placement of cookies
    or to the use of other profiling techniques, it should therefore limit itself to closing this window or area by selecting the appropriate command usually used for this purpose, that is marked by an X usually positioned at the top right of the banner itself, without beingforced to access other areas or pages specifically dedicated to this. It would guarantee, in that so, that precisely by default, the interested party who does not intend to express his consent is not in any way traced or profiled.

    And since luckily html is recognized in the translation of strings by playing with css, I placed an X in the right corner that has the code used for the “save preference” button. And it does exactly what the law requires, closes the banner without anything being selected. On desktop it is perfect. I have a small problem on mobile because the X moves a bit when I scroll up and down the page … maybe if I put the code used you can help me understand how to make it stable even on mobile … as you will have understood I’m not much of a coder ??

    I hope I have helped you to understand the changes taking place in this area, here in Italy, and I am available if you want to ask more.

    Best regards

    Raf

    Plugin Contributor Mathieu Paapst

    (@paapst)

    Hi @bosendorfer ,

    Put two lawyers in one room, and you will get 20 different opinions ??
    I am also not much of a coder, but I do teach Privacylaw at a university. And I know about the new Italian ‘X in the right corner’ requirement. That, however, is not a European requirement, and it is also not mentioned in the latest draft of the ePrivacy Regulation that will eventualy become binding for the whole EU including Italy. I have been told by the Complianz development team that they will, however, add the X possibility to the templates to help you and others in Italy.

    Kind regards,
    Mathieu

    Plugin Contributor Aert Hulsebos

    (@aahulsebos)

    Hi @bosendorfer,

    For the X button; https://complianz.io/changing-dismiss-to-close-button/

    For the other question; https://github.com/Really-Simple-Plugins/complianz-integrations/blob/master/show-banner-on-blocked-content-click.php

    This will change the classes of the button, and will show the banner instead,

    regards Aert

    Thread Starter bosendorfer

    (@bosendorfer)

    You guys are really fantastic … I have no words … just thank you… thank you… thank you… and I take this opportunity to wish you Christmas and Happy New Year!!!

    Raf

Viewing 7 replies - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • The topic ‘A different behavior for the placeholder … is it possible?’ is closed to new replies.