[crankylinuxuser]

The laws won't work.

The internet isn't a "US" thing. It's not a "EU" thing. It's not even a "China" thing (GFoC aside).

The internet's a worldwide thing. And that means, sure your puny law may say you can't do X (ad tracking). Ok. I'll just make a shell company in shithole country, pay some protection money, and run tracking or whatever. And that data I generate will be sold to anyone who wants to buy. I'll make it so everybody has to buy to compete - even if against the law.

And it too is a failing battle in the US. Experian, Equifax, and Transunion... If what happened regarding Equifax didn't bring the corporate death penalty either by fines or dissolution of their corporate charter, nothing will.

[PeterisP]

The advertising infrastructure is largely funded by the big advertisers, and legal issues certainly matter to them.

When (for example) Toyota is paying a bunch of money to target customers in France, they're playing with the same rules as Ford is when targeting the same customers. They don't have to do things against the law to compete in advertising, and they'll even be eager to identify competitors breaking advertising law to screw them over; there has been lots of legal action taken as a result of such industry self-policing to ensure that competitors aren't able to benefit from misleading advertising.

Sure, there are lots of businesses who would by "under the table" data and apply it illegally, and it is a huge advertising market - but it's absolutely dwarfed by the much, much, much larger advertising market funded by the major international public companies. The advertising money flowing from a single company such as Procter&Gamble or Nestle is larger than all the total advertising turnover from whole smallish industries. If you cut off the tracking-adtech companies from the legal market, it's like restricting oxygen for them - they'll still have some customers, but they'll get an order of magnitude less money to do their things.

[your-nanny]

Actually, in that case the centrality or Monopoly of the Apple store and the Google play store makes regulation easier. Censure Apple or Google for the apps sold in their marketplaces that violate the law and they will be taken down.

[crankylinuxuser]

I'm not seeing that case for:

     1. spying apps
     2. the saudi arabian woman-tracking/permission app
     3. chinese social credit app

In the end, it makes them a pile of money, allows them to function in that country and access to that market, and nobody with power cares.

[your-nanny]

I'm not sure I see the objection? Are you saying that the US government doesn't have sufficient carrots and sticks to get app stores like the Apple Store or Google Play to remove apps from US markets that violate US law?