[lolinder]

A business model does not have a right to exist just because individuals would choose to patronize it if legal. There are plenty of predatory business models that capitalize on market failures. "Free" definitely appears to be one of those business models.

[kspacewalk2]

To clarify, you are saying we should legislate away the right of a consumer to consent to a service whereby, in lieu of payment, the consumer is delivered targeted advertisement based on the data generated by their use of the service?

If this phrasing is incorrect, please correct it. It's just really helpful to be clear and precise in such discussions, because people sometimes hide the essence of their argument behind ambiguous verbiage.

[shuntress]

To clarify, the sentiment seems to be that we should legislate the requirement that a consumer must explicitly consent to any service whereby, in lieu of payment, the consumer is delivered targeted advertisement based on the data generated by their use of the service rather than take the consumer use of the service as implicit consent.

[lolinder]

I'm not proposing legislation outlawing any particular business model. If someone can make "free" work while respecting customer data ownership, more power to them.

What I am saying that customer data should legally belong to the customer, and if that makes some business models infeasible, so be it.

[hansvm]

Given the context of GDPR data portability, it seems more likely that they're saying that businesses shouldn't have a right to hold data hostage as a method of lock-in, especially in lieu of providing a service people like enough to voluntarily stick with. The "targeted advertising as payment" thing is a separate can of worms that they may or may not care about.