> They are able to do this because sears.com loads Criteo code and uses a criteo.com cookie<p>> there may not be much you can do about this besides blocking cookies<p>Most browsers let you block 3rd-party cookies without blocking all cookies (in this case, blocking the the criteo.com cookie but not the sears.com cookie, when on sears.com): <a href="https://www.maketecheasier.com/disable-third-party-cookies-chrome-firefox/" rel="nofollow">https://www.maketecheasier.com/disable-third-party-cookies-c...</a>
> The CAN SPAM act actually allows direct marketing email messages to be sent to anyone, without permission, until the recipient explicitly requests that they cease (opt-out).<p>Ladies and gentlemen, let's get this fixed. Spam is not only a waste of resources (bandwidth, time, and money) but it also contributes to malware distribution.<p>What will it take to accomplish this?
That and the fact that any app you download now adds you to their newsletter list. Just because I wanted to try your app, it doesn't mean I want to get tons e-mails from your company. It's so frustrating I stopped trying apps, and instead only download what I really need and/or trust.
Amazon seems to be annoying in this area.<p>I look at a product out of curiosity.<p>Get stuck seeing the same product ads for days everywhere including FB, etc.<p>and yes I use Ublock, Ghostery etc.
Maybe I added it at some point, but "<i>criteo.com</i>" is blocked by uBlock on my machine.<p>Anyway, it's baffling to me that people still defend web advertising. That "industry" is far sleazier and shadier than spammers, but for some reason people here will defend web ads.
Probably more evil than the practice described in the article is at the very end. In order to get them to stop, or not start in the first place, you have to give them your email address. So you have to trust them with the very thing you want them to stop abusing. No thanks. The real answer is a very strict ad blocker. On all your devices. Every time you browse.<p>The only way to keep your personal information safe is to not share it in the first place. Pass all the laws you want and require all the layers of security you can imagine but your data is still not safe; it will eventually get leaked. Either through the actions of hackers, intentional or unintentional leaks, security bugs, or utter incompetence of some human that has legal access to it.
"Browsing your website does not mean I want your spam"<p>"Never miss a story from ART + marketing, when you sign up for Medium. Learn more"<p>Really wish Medium didn't allow custom domains so I could filter them out properly.
Not to justify this behavior, but to explain: retargeting (a.k.a. remarketing) has very good conversion rates. As long as people keep "converting" based on retargeted ads, they will live on.
Perhaps it should be noted that Criteo can send the email on the behalf of Sears, without necessarily giving Sears your email address? Small distinction, maybe, but more squarely within the terms and conditions.
I completely agree that this is an abhorrent practice, but I don't believe that legislation is the answer. Just because someone annoys you, does not mean you need to involve legal precedent.