zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. krageo+(OP)[view] [source] 2018-05-18 10:19:44
The only thing which would make that outrageous would be an element of force (which would make it not consent anyway, but I digress). Instead, you're giving an example that explicitly allows for a denial. That's exactly as it always should have been, so I really don't understand what the point is that you're trying to make here.
replies(1): >>Sagely+gf
2. Sagely+gf[view] [source] 2018-05-18 13:17:56
>>krageo+(OP)
The point is simply that the school is now at risk of huge fines, so in turn it puts pressure on parents to sign as strong as possible waivers. Not many people here seem to understand it but that is what is happening.

The force is of purely psychological nature, of course: "surely, you don't want to cause problems to your school?"

replies(1): >>mirchi+ai
◧◩
3. mirchi+ai[view] [source] [discussion] 2018-05-18 13:42:00
>>Sagely+gf
What richmarr said. If a contract is in place, then the terms of contract would take precedence over GDPR as "legitimate interest". In other words, zero change before or after GDPR. If the school is trying to get free modelling out of the kids with tick boxes, they risk the consequences, GDPR or otherwise.
[go to top]