Google's CMP, a disaster for Admob and developers.

[Faus]

If you use Google's CMP consent dialog, your ruin is underway. Let's assume we use it:

If you enable the "Consent" button alongside the "Do not consent" button, 90% of users will click "Do not consent", as is obvious. This means Admob will serve "limited" ads, which in practice, means ADS WON´T BE SERVED, i.e., ruin.

If you don't include the "Do not consent" button, there's the option to "Manage options". Well, if the user clicks there and then on "Confirm choices", it means Admob will serve "limited" ads because it's practically impossible for a user to give consent to the 190 partners. This means, in practice, that ADS WON´T BE SERVED, i.e., ruin.

The option of using a 3rd party Google-certified TCF-compliant consent management provider to gather consent is unfeasible for most developers because they are very expensive solutions.

Is Admob aware of what they're doing with the new GDPR? Does anyone have an alternative idea besides using a Google-certified CMP due to their costs?

Does GDPR truly  empower users to avoid seeing ads and use your app for free just by pressing a button?

[Test Dvd]

Hello Faus,

If you use a third-party provider to show consent, paying, of course, you get non-personalized ads if the user does not accept the consent?

Things are very screwed up and Google's ump is not going to change it.

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi Faus,

Thank you for contacting the Mobile Ads SDK Support team.

We regret the inconvenience caused. I understand that your query is related to Google's CMP consent policy. I would recommend reaching out to the Product support team as they are better equipped to address your concern. 

 

This message is in relation to case "ref:!00D1U01174p.!5004Q02qAAw1:ref"

Thanks,
 

Mobile Ads SDK Team

 

[Test Dvd]

@Hello Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor,

One question, to change the sdk and have non-personalized ads appear if the user does not accept consent, who should be contacted, with you or with Google Admob?

Is it possible for this to happen (show non-personalized ads without consent) or do we leave it impossible???

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi,

Thank you for getting back to us.

If you wish to show non-personalized ads to users who do not consent to personalized ads, you can contact Google AdMob.

AdMob provides a way to show non-personalized ads to users who do not consent to personalized ads. This is done by using the Non-Personalized Ads setting in the AdMob UI. When this setting is enabled, AdMob will only serve non-personalized ads to users who do not consent to personalized ads.

It is possible to show non-personalized ads without consent. However, it is important to note that doing so may violate the law in some jurisdictions. For example, in the European Union, it is illegal to show personalized ads to users who have not consented to the use of their personal data for this purpose.

If you are unsure whether or not it is legal to show non-personalized ads without consent in your jurisdiction, you should consult with an attorney.

Please reach out to us, if you need any further assistance.

[Faus]

Hi Forum Advisor,
I am a little confused.
You say: "in the European Union, it is illegal to show personalized ads to users who have not consented to the use of their personal data for this purpose".

That is correct, but the issue is that if the user does not consent, why doesn't Admob show non-personalized ads BY DEFAULT if it is not using the user's information?
Could you indicate where in the Admob UI console non-personalized ads can be enabled in case the user does not consent?
My jurisdiction is the EU, what else could it be if we are talking about GDPR?

Thank you so much

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi,

Thank you for getting back to us.

AdMob shows personalized ads by default because this is what most users prefer. Personalized ads are more relevant to users, which means they are more likely to click on them. This means that publishers earn more money from ads, and users see ads that are more likely to be of interest to them.

However, AdMob also allows publishers to show non-personalized ads to users who have not consented to the use of their personal information. To do this, publishers need to enable restricted data processing in the AdMob UI console. 

If you are located in the EU, you may also need to comply with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) . The GDPR requires that publishers obtain consent from users before collecting or using their personal information. If you are not sure whether you need to comply with the GDPR, you should consult with a lawyer.

Here are the steps on how to enable restricted data processing in AdMob :

• Sign in to your AdMob account.
• Click the Settings tab.
• Click the Privacy & Messaging tab.
• Click the US state regulations tab.
• Under Restricted data processing, select the Restrict data processing option.
• Click Save.

Once you have enabled restricted data processing, AdMob will only show non-personalized ads to users who have not consented to the use of their personal information.

[Test Dvd]

Hi Form Advisor,

 I'm confused too.

Do you mean that if we follow the steps you indicate and show the ump sdk and the user accepts the consent, they will have personalized ads and if they reject it, non-personalized ads will be shown?

You put EEUU state regulations, doesn't it work for Europe?

Would it be legal for Admob to do that?

Thank you.

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi,

Thank you for getting back to us.

I confirm that the user accepts the consent, they will have personalized ads and if they reject it, non-personalized ads will be shown.

Beginning January 16, 2024, if a partner does not adopt a Google-certified CMP, no ads will be eligible to serve on EEA and UK traffic. Traffic from a Google-certified CMP will continue to be eligible for personalized ads or non-personalized ads (NPA).

Please refer to this link for more information.

[Piszok Alfréd]

Currently the "Do not consent" button sets the followings ( Android / user-messaging-platform:2.1.0 ):

    hasGoogleVendorConsent: false
    hasGoogleVendorLI: true
    hasConsent for purposes: 1-false, 3-false, 4-false
    hasConsentOrLegitimateInterest for purposes: 2-true, 7-true, 9-true, 10-true

According to this description ( https://support.google.com/admob/answer/9760862#consent-policies ):
  - Personalized ads - Consent for purposes 1,3,4, Legitimate Interest for 2, 7, 9, 10
  - Non personalized ads - Consent for purpose 1, Legitimate Interest for 2, 7, 9, 10
  - Limited ads - No consent for purpose 1

It is obvious, that without purpose 1 (and the Google vendor consent) no ads will be served, not even non-personalized ones.

This should be changed inside of the UMP lib.

[Piszok Alfréd]

The UMP consent dialog (Android/user-messaging-platform:2.1.0) sets the following values by clicking the "Do not consent" button:

    hasGoogleVendorConsent: false
    hasGoogleVendorLI: true
    hasConsent for purposes: 1-false, 3-false, 4-false
    hasConsentOrLegitimateInterest for purposes: 2-true, 7-true, 9-true, 10-true

According to this description ( https://support.google.com/admob/answer/9760862#consent-policies ) the following applies:

- Personalized ads - Consent for purposes 1,3,4, Legitimate Interest for 2, 7, 9, 10
- Non personalized ads - Consent for purpose 1, Legitimate Interest for 2, 7, 9, 10

- Limited ads - No consent for purpose 1.

This means, that the "Do not consent" button sets purpose 1 to false (and also no Google VendorConsent) and so not even Non-personalized ads are served.

This needs to be changed/corrected inside of the UMP library.

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi,

Thank you for getting back to us.

One way to fix this is to change the value of hasGoogleVendorConsent to true when the "Do not consent" button is clicked. This will ensure that Non-personalized ads are still served.

Another way to fix this is to add a new option to the UMP consent dialog that allows users to choose whether they want to receive Non-personalized ads. This will give users more control over their ad experience.

Kindly refer to the Help center article for more information about it.

Please reach out to us, if you need any further assistance.
 

[Andreas]

Forum Advisor, have you now given up completely?

This answer was clearly written by someone who has NO grasp of the situation - probably your experimental Large Language Model over at bard.google.com.

There is no "hasGoogleVendorConsent" variable to change to some arbitrary value, and there is no way for us to "add a new option to the UMP consent dialog". Stop that nonsense!

[Piszok Alfréd]

I don't understand how to use your answer in practice because I don't know about any way to do your suggested actions with the UMP library from Google (Android/user-messaging-platform:2.1.0).

What the average developer does is what Google suggest to do:
- Configure "General Data Protection Regulation" for the app in the Admob console
- Include the the UMP library into the app ( https://developers.google.com/admob/android/privacy )
- Call the "consentInformation.requestConsentInfoUpdate(...)" method
- Handle the consentInformation.canRequestAds()

I don't know any way to have a click handler for the "Do not consent" button.
I don't know any way to set the value of the "hasGoogleVendorConsent" directly (Or should the SharedPreferences/IABTCF_VendorConsents manipulated manually?).
I don't know any way to "add a new option to the UMP consent dialog that allows users to choose whether they want to receive Non-personalized ads" because the UMP library and dialog is fully in control of Google.

Can you please advise how to proceed further to solve this disturbing situation?

[Test Dvd]

Hello Andreas,

Are you suggesting that an AI is giving us the answers??

They have answered me that if the user accepts the consent, personalized ads will be shown and if they reject it, non-personalized ads will be shown.

Isn't this true??

So far this is not the case, it is clear from the hundreds of messages on the forum.

[Andreas]

I don't know if this is done as part of an official Google policy, or if it is just some overworked and underpaid person in the probably outsourced call center for our support requests who copies our questions into some AI tool and the replies back - but yes, I am convinced that many replies we get here aren't written by a knowledgeable human, but just some automaton that is lacking context and some screws.

Just yesterday, I saw this thread with a completely bonkers suggestion about what proguard rules to add to an Android project in order for UMP to work. The UMP SDK does not actually have those dependencies - and in fact, if you open bard.google.com and paste in the first question, and then (independent of whatever Bard replies) the second question, you will get answers very similar to what was answered there, with fictional dependencies all over the place: https://groups.google.com/g/google-admob-ads-sdk/c/L0VC5fAkvyA/m/ztH9e_aEBQAJ

Regarding your question, I am sure that non-personalized ads will NOT be shown if the user rejects. Forum Advisor may claim otherwise, but when pressed will regularly state that "if there's no consent, NPA will be shown - but Google needs purpose 1 consent to show NPA". That statement is in itself so illogical that it is laughable to even give that reply.

[Faus]

It's impossible to get a correct and accurate response, and I suspect what Andreas is saying is true.

In my opinion, it's a MONEY issue. 

When Admob realizes they're losing MONEY MONEY MONEY because the apps aren't serving ads, they'll react (I hope). 

By then, small developers will have lost a lot of money.

He/it says: 'Click the US state regulations tab,' unbelievable, when we're talking about EEA and UK.

They're wasting our time.

Let's see if I can summarize it and they finally understand:

Almost no user is going to give consent for purpose 1 and then go through a list of 191 providers to find 'Google Advertising Products' to check the consent box.

One user uninstalled my app and their comment, after giving it a 1-star rating, was:

"I went through them one by one, deactivating all of them, and after 80, I got tired. I'm sorry, but no."

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi Faus,

Thank you for getting back to us.

We regret the inconvenience caused. I understand that your query is related to Google's CMP consent policy. I would recommend reaching out to the Product support team as they are better equipped to address your concern. Please note that we can only assist with technical queries/concerns related to the Mobile Ads SDK.

[Faus]

Hi Forum Advisor,

thank you to you for the same automatic response.

[Test Dvd]

Hello Faus,

I don't think it's a MONEY issue. It is clear that Google will lose money, as will the developers, but they know TODAY and they do nothing. They must have some reason to not allow non-personalized ads if there is no consent.

It's totally absurd...

[Piszok Alfréd]

My question went maybe down in the sea of other correspondence. I just repeat it and kindly ask you the help me figure out what to do.

------

I don't understand how to use your answer in practice because I don't know about any way to do your suggested actions with the UMP library from Google (Android/user-messaging-platform:2.1.0).

What the average developer does is what Google suggest to do:
- Configure "General Data Protection Regulation" for the app in the Admob console
- Include the the UMP library into the app ( https://developers.google.com/admob/android/privacy )
- Call the "consentInformation.requestConsentInfoUpdate(...)" method
- Handle the consentInformation.canRequestAds()

I don't know any way to have a click handler for the "Do not consent" button.
I don't know any way to set the value of the "hasGoogleVendorConsent" directly (Or should the SharedPreferences/IABTCF_VendorConsents manipulated manually?).
I don't know any way to "add a new option to the UMP consent dialog that allows users to choose whether they want to receive Non-personalized ads" because the UMP library and dialog is fully in control of Google.

Can you please advise how to proceed further to solve this disturbing situation?

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi Piszok,

Thank you for getting back to us.

I will check with our team regarding your query and one of my team members will reach out to you once we have an update on this. Meanwhile, your patience is highly appreciated.
 

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi,

My name is Nick from the Google Mobile Ads SDK. I understand you have some questions about the UMP / Google CPM. This is a pretty long thread with much going on, so feel free to correct me if I misunderstand the question(s).

> I don't know any way to have a click handler for the "Do not consent" button.

This is technically true, but you can infer the users click by checking consent status after the `loadAndShowConsentFormIfRequired` call.

> I don't know any way to set the value of the "hasGoogleVendorConsent" directly (Or should the SharedPreferences/IABTCF_VendorConsents manipulated manually?).

Agree with your confusion here. I think what is being suggested is reading the TCF string manually to determine the specifics of consent. We have a doc here: https://developers.google.com/admob/android/privacy/gdpr#how_to_read_consent_choices_2

> I don't know any way to "add a new option to the UMP consent dialog that allows users to choose whether they want to receive Non-personalized ads" because the UMP library and dialog is fully in control of Google.

Agree, this is not currently possible.

Hope this helps,
Nick

ref:!00D1U01174p.!5004Q02qAAw1:ref

[Ján Zelenec]

So i have testing UMP platform actually, i have up to 400 users and consetnt percentage is up to 74% thats its good. Its look like the people automatically clicking for consent button (not do not consent) by learning from web pages with popup windows which show if you accept cookies...  

So result is pretty good but if  have somebody here idea how deal with user which click on Do not consent button ? I have tried too bud no limited ads are show. Simply nothing. Why ? 

Dátum: utorok 14. novembra 2023, čas: 20:59:16 UTC+1, odosielateľ: Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor

[Test Dvd]

Ján,

Limited ads means 0 ads, as the word says, they are limited, they are not displayed.

[Faus]

Hi Ján, Nick,

You have 74% NOW, and I agree with what you're saying about websites. However, when users learn that simply by clicking the "Manage options" button and then "Confirm choices," the app they are using stops displaying ads, two things will happen in my opinion:

• Who will be the fool to purchase an app to avoid ads?
• Possibly, that 74% may drop to 5%, 10%, 20% if we're optimistic? For you, for me, and for Google/AdMob.

This is what I believe Google/AdMob hasn't thought about or there's a reason we don't know for allowing that posibility (ads free)

As soon as users discover this trick, I have no doubt they will share it on social media. "Hey, man, did you know that with 2 clicks, you can get rid of ads?"

[erdenk...@gmail.com]

So this means if in January CMP becomes mandatory all users can just avoid Ads by denying consent? 

The issue seems to me that Google/Admob wants to avoid the option to show real non-personalized ads, they want to get data even from non-personalized ads, and that is legally not possible in EU. So they not give this option because they have fear that this is used in other countries too and eventually personalized ads and even minor data collection through ads will be fully eradicated.

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi Bilbo,

Correct, a Google certified CPM will be mandatory in January. If a user denies consent, the publisher will be served limited ads. Some publishers are reading the TCF string in order to identify users who deny consent.

I will make note of your frustration and let the product team know. If you have any other feedback, please let me know.

[erdenk...@gmail.com]

So this means Admob is practically dead from next year on. I will look for alternatives.

[Alex Cretney]

@everyone on this thread...

That's at least 6 of us who have realised that without saying as much, google are basically binning off AdMob. 

Would it be worth us setting up a Discord or something where we (and everyone else who comes looking) can all discuss alternatives and support each other? 

For my part, I'm a relative newbie Flutter developer and have already done a bit of exploration on alternatives... Appodeal seems like a possibility and they have a Flutter SDK. However i ended up running into technical issues which resulted in my not being able to get it to work in the end. That's very possibly just down to my inexperience because their SDK installation instructions assume a bit of knowledge around the traditional Android and IOS ecosystems (pods etc..) that i simply don't have. 

If we had a Discord i figure we could all share our knowledge when it comes to exploring alternatives and perhaps provide each other a bit of support. Seems like a good way to identify the 'best' alternative and getting us all setup as quickly as possible rather than us all struggling down our own paths. 

Would anyone be interested if i setup a discord? 

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi Alex,

Google is not 'binning AdMob'. Google Ads and Admob is an important part of Google and is a very active development kit.

I understand you may be frustrated with the changes in policies, If you have and specific questions or requests feel free to ask.

Thanks,

[Cosmo Frame]

I have looked into this problem some months ago. What I found, was that there seems to be only one solution when using Googles SDK. And it's a BAD one:

1. Show consent dialog

2. Show fullscreen ad

3. Catch error of the ad

4. If ads never show, show dialog along the lines of "This app is financed by ads and cannot run without them, try consenting"

5. Reset consent information

6. Quit app.

It's horrible I know, but I see no other way to avoid free users.

On a side note: Google has known about this issue for many months. And for just as long has responded in a very strange way when asked about it. At some point I have gotten hold of an actual developer of the SDK, and from what he said, the behavior is 100% intended as is. Ads are not supposed to show in the cases presented here.

So I would not count on a solution by Google before the deadline in January.

[Ján Zelenec]

Also one question for  " If a user denies consent, the publisher will be served limited ads." : Now if user deny consent then no ads are displayed ? After 24 Jan. 2024  will be displayed anyway ? (With consent, without consent - limited) ? From my side are any solution needed ? 

Dátum: streda 15. novembra 2023, čas: 20:25:42 UTC+1, odosielateľ: Alex Cretney

[Alex Cretney]

Hi Nick,

If Admob was an important part of google you wouldn't be betraying the developers who helped make the platform so profitable for you and who depend on it to feed their families. 

You refuse to use real language and so the whole discussion from googles side is disingenuous... To be served 'limited ads' isn't a 'less desirable' fallback... it actually means no ads. You won't even say the words 'If the user denies consent they will be served no ads'. You've invented your own term which means 'no ads' but sounds more palatable in a sentence. That is how dishonest this whole discussion is. 

Google don't seem to understand that the EU and GDPR are NOT stalwart defenders of human liberty... The EU is a highly corrupt barrier of mind numbing bureaucracy that imposes rules nobody asked for that serve the interests of big money lobbyists. Those interests are usually to erect such a wall of red tape that it becomes impossible for independents to compete. It's ALL about monopoly. 

If GDPR and other privacy laws WERE about human liberty it would be simple and easy for a normal personal to understand... All of this complexity would be boiled down to 2 simple questions

1) Are you happy for this service to use information about your browsing habits to serve personalised ads? (Some people wont mind)

2) Are you happy for the provider of this service to sell your data to 3rd parties so they can start marketing crap to you? (Everyone will say no which rightfully destroys an industry of direct marketing parasites) 

Further... these questions would be asked at the browser/app-store level... A person answers them ONCE when they setup their phone and those responses apply to every app/website unless they specifically state they want to be asked each time. 

That's it... that's literally the only 2 questions the common person would understand or care about and they would only want to be bothered with them once... They don't care about 'legal basis', they don't want to learn an entirely new language of privacy legalese and they do NOT want to read through thousands of words of policy every time they open an app or a website. Do you personally feel your web browsing experience has IMPROVED since the imposition of these privacy laws?? Do you feel like you really control your data now? Every time you open a website you have to click through these popups you don't have time to read... Everyones experience is worse! 

If this were TRULY about rights and liberty, the above is what it would look like. If only we lived in that world! 

Now GDPR and privacy laws is obviously nothing you can personally influence... However... If Google really believed in 'Do the right thing', they would consider it a point of civic duty to protect the interests of their developers as well as their users. This would mean... 

A) Wherever legislation is passed that provides zero value, benefits the big guy, harms the little guy, and is VOLUNTARY (as in this case) that you DON'T volunteer to participate

B) Your interpretation and implementation of the requirements (which is infinite because even the people passing the legislation don't know what they mean) is as loose and conducive to free competition and enterprise as possible 

What Google has actually done is write off the army of developers who have helped build Google to what it is today by essentially cutting them out of the profit loop because you want to 'appear' like you care about peoples privacy... I note there is no option for me to not consent to YouTube ads by the way... That's a Google product is it not? When is advertising on YouTube going to end? Or do we have a double standard here? 

Sorry for the rant.. i understand you're just towing the company line, but this whole thing is like a pressure pot... People can only be gaslighted for so long. We're talking about our ability to pay our mortgages and eat and we just want these concerns taken seriously. 

Regarding my specific question i have posted it and been essentially ignored for over a week now. I have an issue with my app-ads.txt not being crawled and all i ever get is the same stock list of troubleshooting articles i've gone through a dozen times. No-one at google actually reads the specifics of my question or cares. Maybe you're one of the good guys, but generally speaking this 'support' service just seems to be an exercise in getting fobbed off so tickets are closed to meet KPIs. 

[erdenk...@gmail.com]

Alex Cretney schrieb am Donnerstag, 16. November 2023 um 06:27:42 UTC+1:

What Google has actually done is write off the army of developers who have helped build Google to what it is today by essentially cutting them out of the profit loop because you want to 'appear' like you care about peoples privacy... I note there is no option for me to not consent to YouTube ads by the way... That's a Google product is it not? When is advertising on YouTube going to end? Or do we have a double standard here? 

Google could show non-personalized ads even with limited ads, but it decided not to.

Google does not care about the small developers, most money comes from a few big one and those have a mob of lawyers so they will make money from ads anyway. Of course Google has other standards for itself, you will see ads on Search and YouTube regardless what the user answers or clicked in the privacy settings. 

 

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi Alex,

This is the second time (first time at https://groups.google.com/g/google-admob-ads-sdk/c/SRYaRFf7aeY/m/zDqM-QzCAwAJ) where your posts have not been constructive. We plan to moderate posts from your account going forward before letting them publish, please keep the conversation cordial and constructive. Note that you can also submit feedback 1:1 through https://developers.google.com/admob/android/support or https://developers.google.com/admob/ios/support which routes to the same support team.

Regarding Limited Ads, I understand the frustration that if you only use AdMob network and no mediation, this currently means no ads. However, to those who enable mediation, the fact that waterfall mediation still runs is an important clarification. Additionally, the help center at https://support.google.com/admob/answer/10105530 has a section demand eligibility stating that this is the "initial offering". This indicates the offering may expand in the future, without changing "Limited Ads" as the feature name. I don't expect any changes prior to the enforcement, but we understand this is a pain point. 

Re: app-ads, it looks like you already have a separate thread on that topic that got a response within 1 day at https://groups.google.com/g/google-admob-ads-sdk/c/lqd6Nd8JWcs/m/Oz6mZen7AQAJ. To set expectations there, that is more of a product question more than an SDK integration question, so we won't be able to offer much help beyond pointing to help center resources such as https://support.google.com/admob/answer/9363762, and https://support.google.com/admob/gethelp is the recommended support channel for that.

Thanks,
Eric, Mobile Ads SDK Team

ref:!00D1U01174p.!5004Q02qAAw1:ref

[Marco veLi]

So we only have one solution? -> Disable functionality of the App when consent ist not given?

Is this allowed according to the policies?

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi Marco,

Thank you for contacting the Mobile Ads SDK support team.

I will check with our team regarding your query and one of my team members will reach out to you once we have an update on this. Meanwhile, your patience is highly appreciated. 

This message is in relation to case "ref:!00D1U01174p.!5004Q02qCoKJ:ref"

Thanks,
 

Mobile Ads SDK Team

[Alex Cretney]

Hi Eric, 

Thanks for the response. 

If waterfall mediation still runs that is indeed an important clarification...  does this mean if a user denies all consents, they will still be served un-targeted ads by non google ad providers within the waterfall? 

The reason i ask is that the same article states the following... "Under TCF v2.0, we check that ad technology providers and other programmatic demand sources don’t violate Google policy and have at least one legal basis for processing data prior to including them in the mediation waterfall"

That suggests to me that even 3rd party ad providers in the waterfall are blocked if a user denies consent? This would again mean a complete inability to monetise? 

Regarding my app-ads issue, i understand this is not your remit but being redirected to the 'product' team is unfortunately a complete dead end. I've contacted them perhaps 10 times at this point and every single time they refuse to read the question and just post the same set of troubleshooting links which i have gone though time and time again. Platinum product expert 'Hezi Medina' is the worst for this. Even if you ask a simple and specific yes/no question such as 'is there anything wrong with the format of this app-ads.txt file' or 'doesn't this console log prove my app-ads.txt has indeed been crawled' will be met with the same stock response of trouble shooting links so it becomes impossible to even cross things off the candidate list of problems and isolate the issue. 

Product team support is therefore in reality non-existent so apologies if my frustrations with them has resulted in blowback to the SDK team. Short of replacing/retraining your product support team however, pressure is going to continue to mount. 

[Cosmo Frame]

I actually did not want to get involved in this discussion, since I already went through it several month ago and apparently not much has changed.
But seeing that some people seem to be still as confused as I was back then I would like to share some information I gathered over a long time period back then.
Take everything with more than a grain of salt, as the information is months old and often I had to read between the lines of cryptic answers from the Google team.

So first the current situation:
Right now if a user consents to the usage of personal information you can show personalized ads (Google's standard ads).
If he does not consent you can show "non-personalized ads".
Most developers are fine with this.

But here is the list of problems and events why this is changing:

1. "Non-personalized ads" is a term/concept/implementation created by Google internally.
It was created in hopes of fulfilling regulations.
The term is not however part of the EU regulation and the implementation likewise is not specifically allowed by that regulation.

2. At some point someone in the Google legal team voiced concern that "Non-personalized ads" do not fulfill the newest, strictest legal requirement. At this point this was probably more than a year ago.
Note that in the EU fines scale with the size of a company. For Google this would mean astronomical fines.

3. A new category of ads was invented by Google called "Limited ads" these should obey any regulation.
Here is the banger though: It was never defined what "Limited ads" actually are besides legal. And the implementation was set to the safest placeholder : Limited ads = no ads.

4. The situation did not change for many months so that the "placeholder" just became the real implementation. And development in that regard will not really continue until someone higher in the Google chain of commands says so.


So that's the information I gathered. Here is my theory of what will happen:
No one at Google wants to be responsible for a 100 Million Dollar fine because he changed the definition of what "Limited ads" are.
So I suspect nothing will happen until the deadline comes around.
Once it does two things can happen:

a) nothing much changes
b) Google has massive losses in revenue and someone thus decides to tackle this problem.

[Andreas]

Eric from the Mobile Ads SDK Team,

I don't know what level of "not being constructive" prompted your response to Alex, but please allow me to chime in as someone who has endured the level of "support" your team is offering in this forum in regards to Google's own CMP solution for more than a year. We regularly have to deal with

a) answers that simply state that this forum is not the correct venue for Google UMP SDK (because it just deals with "Mobile Ads"), when the Google UMP offering is in fact a part of "Mobile Ads", or mention alternatives that just don't work - e.g. the exact link you are giving in your reply, https://support.google.com/admob/gethelp, just doesn't work and instead reproducibly leads to an error, and has done so for more than a year.

b) answers that ask us to perform clearly useless tasks, such as creating example projects, sending Charles logs and/or specific ad IDs, when the problem is not even about displaying individual ads.

c) answers that are as evasive as they can be - e.g. claiming that of course users might see "non-personalized ads" when not giving full consent, but conveniently "forgetting" to mention that even those NPA need consent for at least one consent category, plus consent for at least one vendor

d) answers that are factually wrong on a level that everyone who has just a tiny grasp of Google's SDKs should understand - e.g. suggesting Proguard rules involving dependencies that are clearly not used by the SDK in question, or suggesting US-centric solutions when the question was explicitly about the EU.

Just as your UMP product fails miserably to do the one job it is supposed to be, your support forum does as well - and I believe that even if you aren't able or allowed to publicly agree with that, you know perfectly well. I understand that, with Google having big problems both internally and externally, it is easiest to not stick out your own head by too much - but if you can't even give us honest answers in a support forums that works as expected, what is this even good for? Please, do something about the state of support you are (or rather aren't) offering.

FWIW, I'm looking forward to January 16, 2024, when even more developers learn the hard way that all the Googls SDKs they rely on aren't worth much. I hope you've prepared something useful by then, because just dangling the carrot of a potential alternative with FLoC/Privacy Sandbox or whatever it is called by now at some point in 2024 will likely be too little, too late.

[Test Dvd]

I don't know if I understood correctly, admob does not use non-personalized ads but if we use mediation, they would be shown if the user does not accept consent. Is it like that??

@Cosmo Frame, thanks for the explanation.
I think it will be option a) that you mention.

Google is going to lose a lot of money (like us) but if they are complying with the law they will leave it at that. I doubt they will go bankrupt.

@Marco Veli, can we make the user not use the application if they do not give their consent? How would this be done?

@Alex Cretney,
It's a good idea to create a Discord so we can help each other.

How can we do it ??

[Cristian]

Tell me if i understand correctly, so basically, starting january 14, developers will not be able to show non-personalized ads (realistically i mean, not theoretically). This won't change unless Google changes something in the mechanism?

[Marco veLi]

Well, for the first few months after 16. January we will be good I guess because from my experience 95% of the users will consent anyway. But sooner or later this "non-ad trick" will ofc make rounds, starting when "big" YouTubers will make videos on "how to get ad--free apps". 

Hopefully someone comes up with a decent solution in the next time.

Stay up guys, greets

[Marco veLi]

I have checked some "big" apps with more than > 10 Millionen downloads and yea, if you don't consent no ads will be displayed, so there's def no workaround for this :/

Greets

On Friday, November 17, 2023 at 5:13:49 PM UTC+1 Andreas wrote:

[ABDJ]

Just Want to Add a New piece of information:

Not even Backfill Ads will be served if the user choose anything different than "Consent"!

There is something really wrong with  Google's CMP consent dialog.

[Marco veLi]

I think you are not allowed to force the user to give consent to use your app, but I think you can disable some functionality of your app when the user doesn't consent, but I'm not sure if this allowed.

Maybe someone give advice on this.

Greets

[Andreas]

I've seen references to not being allowed to disable some or all app functionality if ads can not be displayed multiple times now, but I couldn't find any regulation on that in either the GDPR, the IAB TCF publications, or in the Google Play Policy center, although I may of course have misinterpreted some of the legalese I've read.  I don't know where else to look, because these three resources already seem to cover the whole chain from "what use of PII is legally allowed" to "how does Google want us to behave in their marketplace".

I don't think that outright disabling ALL app functionality is a useful thing to do - as an app user, that would be a quick uninstall and 1-star rating from me - but I currently don't see how a sort of "freemium" model off offering some functionality for free, and then increasing the offer only if either ads are allowed or the user buys an in-app product or subscription would break any rules.

For what it's worth, the fact that an app "contains ads" is part of the store description, and thus might even be construed to be part of the implicit contract between developer and user. If that is the case, how could the user later have any grounds to argue that they should still be able to access all functionality if they prevent ads from being shown?

(disclaimer as always: I am not a lawyer)

[Alessandro Iurlano]

I think you could ask users to pay for the app if they are not giving consent. I am not sure if this is legal or not, but I have seen several leading newspapers asking for subscriptions if one does not provide the consent they need. Even Meta announced this for Facebook. More on this here (https://www.bruegel.org/analysis/pay-or-consent-challenge-platform-regulators)

Does anyone have experience with InMobi CMP (https://www.inmobi.com/cmp) which seems to be free?

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Google Mobile Ads SDK Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/google-admob-ads-sdk/xRaBKayC_80/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to google-admob-ads...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-admob-ads-sdk/63760db0-7f57-477b-ae44-09dee5a1f495n%40googlegroups.com.

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Regarding mediation for limited ads:
Beginning January 16, 2024, if a partner does not adopt a Google-certified CMP, only Limited Ads will be eligible to serve on EEA and UK traffic. Per the Limited Ads “Demand Eligibility” section, the initial offering for Limited Ads is just waterfall mediation, meaning no ads are returned from the AdMob network.

Regarding Forum Support:
I understand your concerns, and even agree with some of them. We are currently taking your feedback, and will make improvements.

Regarding VIP users: 
I can not speak to what is legal or not, but I have seen apps give different experiences to 'VIP' users that purchase a battle pass or make similar premium transactions. Perhaps you can refine your search to review those topics.


 

ref:!00D1U01174p.!5004Q02qAAw1:ref

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi Marco,

Consent is required for ads business per regional law. However,  you can use any CMP from the List of Google-certified CMPs to collect consent.

Best,
Jill
Google Mobile Ads SDK Team

ref:!00D1U01174p.!5004Q02qCoKJ:ref

[Marco veLi]

Hi,

Thx but i don't see any way you can use their CMP solution from the websites that are listed there.

Greets

[uayo]

Hello everyone! I think it's a very good idea to create a discord group so we can communicate and help each other with this issue. As you mentioned @Alex Cretney & @Test Dvd have you already created a discord group?

[Test Dvd]

Hi uayo,

No, no Discord group has been created for this yet.

I still think it would be a good idea because from this forum, Google doesn't help at all.

[joe...@gmail.com]

@Forum Advisor, Followup question for:

Regarding mediation for limited ads:
Beginning January 16, 2024, if a partner does not adopt a Google-certified CMP, only Limited Ads will be eligible to serve on EEA and UK traffic. Per the Limited Ads “Demand Eligibility” section, the initial offering for Limited Ads is just waterfall mediation, meaning no ads are returned from the AdMob network.

I interpreted this as the following: If a user clicks on 'Manage Options' and then 'Confirm choices' they will receive 'Limited Ads', which actually means the AdMob network will NOT fill those ads. Aka zero ads will be shown to the user if you do not have any Mediation/other Ad sources.

However.. if the Ad Unit is implemented in a Mediation group (within our AdMob UI) with Bidding sources, then other publishers will still be able to fill the ads??

If this is in-fact true, then it seems like the solution to no ads showing/filling would be to register an account with a 3rd party Ad provider that's supported by AdMob Bidding (such as* Ad Generation / Chocolate Platform / EMX / Equative / Fluct / Improve Digital / Index Exchange / Media.net / Meta / Mobfox / etc.), and set up the proper Mediation Groups (Again, within AdMob UI)

*I got this list of providers by navigating to AdMob UI -> Mediation (left column) -> Bidding sources -> Set up ad source -> Then I simply wrote down the first 10 in the list. There are currently 28 available.

If my assumption is incorrect, please clarify the discrepancies.

Thank you in advance! 😃

[Marco veLi]

We need clear instructions on how far we are allowed to disable functionality of our app when consent is not given.

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi Marco,

No, we don't maintain any documentation for other CMPs as they are not Google products. However, same law applies to other CMPs, for EEA users, consent is required if you app integrates with ad networks.

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

@Joe

We can only give guidance on our AdMob network. You will have to follow up with those individual ad networks for more specific guidance on their ad network functionality related to consent. 

@Marco

Please see How to read consent choices as a helper for implementing your app functionality logic if consent is given or not. We cannot give more guidance than that as your implementation is on a per-app basis. 

Thanks,
Justin

ref:!00D1U01174p.!5004Q02qAAw1:ref

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

@Joe

And as a follow up for more clarification: Ad generation, chocolate platform, etc are bidding not waterfall. AdColony, Unity, InMobi, Vungle, etc. support waterfall. That said, Google still needs a valid legal basis for calling the waterfall network. See some of our other FAQs for more information, such as questions related to mediation and consent. 

[Marco veLi]

Hi Justin, thx 4 answer.

We actually know how to check consent status, and we also know that there's nothing to do about the fact that you can't display ads when consent is not given, which means app developers won't generate income.

As most of us, we rely on ads-income to provide free apps. So the only way is to disable parts of our app when consent is not given. The Question is if this is allowed to Google play policies.

Greetz

[Paolo Quattrociocchi]

I contacted Admob support, they replied that there is no way to intercept the choice made by the user. I wanted to block the functionality of the application if a user does not accept the viewing of advertising.
Do you think this is not possible? 

[Rabia Demir]

İyi günler Ben reklam geliri ve ödüllü video geçişi hakkında bilgi almk istiyorum ve vTcler i aktarma hakkında 

30 Kas 2023 Per 06:15 tarihinde 'Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor' via Google Mobile Ads SDK Developers <google-adm...@googlegroups.com> şunu yazdı:

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Mobile Ads SDK Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-admob-ads...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-admob-ads-sdk/FCR12000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000S4X2DB00EOjcl-3oSCWF0RECdXQ_xA%40sfdc.net.

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

@all

For app functionality based on consent choices, the answer depends on what functionality you are blocking. That said, we cannot give guidance on the functionality threshold that is compliant with Google Play policies as this may vary on a per-app basis. Our FAQ does our best to answer this question. Since each app is different, in short, publishers should review their obligations under relevant regulations with legal counsel.

[Giorgio]

Hi Justin, 
I have read carefully all the FAQs from the link you sent, and they explain everything well except for the question 'Can I change how my app functions if users don't consent? Is this allowed by policy?' which is the one we all here currently want the answer to. In fact, the response provided below only reiterates that publishers can check consent, but it's not explained at all whether it's possible to limit the app's functionalities if consent is not given. It almost seems like they want to avoid the topic...

Since, as stated in your response, each app is different, I would like to ask a simple and direct question:
In my free app, solely based on ads, where the user has never paid, can I COMPLETELY disable the app until GDPR consent is provided? (This is what happens, for example, on some websites if you use an ad-blocker, where all functionalities are blocked until it's disabled)

I'm sure the situation described in my question concerns many developers here, and regardless of the type of app, my question is general and comprehensive as it involves the complete disabling of the app, except for the consent dialogue and a possible message explaining the importance of ads for the app's maintenance.

If Google cannot answer this specific question, I strongly believe that, at this moment, they have chosen not to address the issue and avoid discussing it, leaving us small developers on our own. I hope you can prove me wrong and provide a clear answer to my question.

Thanks,

Giorgio

[Alex Cretney]

@Giorgio

You wont get a straight answer. 

The part i find amusing is that google are still happy to charge infrastructure costs (i.e firebase) for the users they tell us we can't monetise... 

Not allowing us to receive pay for our work is one thing but If google were truly about 'do the right thing', they would (as a 1.67 trillion dollar company) at the least absorb the costs of those free users rather than actually bill hard working developers with families to support. 

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi Giorgio,

Feel free to try out that implementation for experiment's sake; however, the Google Mobile Ads SDK has no bearing, insight and/or scope into the apps that Google Play store will reject or not. We have no control over apps that get rejected or not. Any advice from this forum based on what you can/cannot from an app functionality standpoint is speculation. Please to refer to our FAQ as a source truth; for example, you should review your obligations under relevant regulations with legal counsel. If you're looking for other guidance, there's always the Product Support channel for a broader scope of support. 

[Faus]

Hello, 

given that Google intends for users of my app to use it for free with just 2 clicks, I have a question. 

As a citizen of the EU and a YouTube user who has to watch several ads with each video, I demand to know how to revoke my consent so that ads are not displayed from now on. Because I assume that GDPR not only affects apps but also YouTube.

On the other hand, this link explains how to determine whether a user has given their consent or not.
https://itnext.io/android-admob-consent-with-ump-personalized-or-non-personalized-ads-in-eea-3592e192ec90

Thank you very much.

[Luis Gualandi]

I'm also curious why is Google cutting ads in Admob but not in Youtube lol

[netl...@gmail.com]

That's funny, I am also looking to deny cookies and tracking from the Youtube app for example (as it seems to be my right) and enable "Limited ads", but I can't see any way to do it. Am I missing something here? Or maybe we will find out on Jan 16.

[Andreas]

While I completely agree with the sentiment and the underlying annoyance with Google's attitude of "do as I say, not as I do" regarding YouTube vs. AdMob, I am sure that too many comments along these lines will just give the next actual Google employee seeing this a welcome excuse to close this thread as off-topic and thus quickly bury it below the fold.

Perhaps it should rather be kept open and where everyone can quickly find it with continued on-topic discussion of the problem.

[Cristina]

Hello, Like everyone here, I am trying to find a solution to the disaster that comes with the lack of ads in the event that "Limited Ads" are requested. According to my searches among different forums and Google articles, I seem to interpret that by implementing cascade mediation, although admob does not offer ads, the rest of the bidders can do so. This is so? Has anyone implemented cascading mediation and checked to see if limited ads are shown? is it a possible solution?

Thank you all

[Andreas]

Hi Cristina,

in a reply further up in this thread, Google's "Forum Advisor" account claimed that "Google still needs a valid legal basis for calling the waterfall network". If this is true, then it is very likely that no ads (even from other sources) will be shown in a "Limited Ads" scenario - because a lack of legal basis is what led to "Limited Ads" in the first place.

The Forum Advisor account is notoriously wrong about a lot of things, most of the time, though, so perhaps they want to rephrase that again. For what it's worth, though, I've not yet seen any suggestion of a mediation configuration that will lead to ads from any source being displayed after a user did anything else than clicking "Consent all" in the UMP dialog. 

[Alex Cretney]

Hilariously, there is and always has been a legal basis called 'Legitimate Interest'

Legitimate Interest is simply a declaration from the developer that the app services could not be provided without a certain minimum level of data. 

In our cases, we have a 'Legitimate Interest' in collecting the minimum level of data needed to serve at least un-targeted ads. If we can't do that, then we can't cover infrastructure costs and so it is true to say the app services cannot be provided without it... Our basis is 'Legitimate Interest'.

Idiotically though, the google consent form gives the user the option to 'unconsent' from 'legitimate interest' which makes absolutely zero sense. 'Consent' and 'Legitimate Interest' are entirely separate legal basis's and have nothing to do with each other. 

Whoever is leading their interpretation of data privacy laws is unfortunately terrible at their job and it seems we all have to starve and default on our mortgages until this person is exposed and either trained or replaced. 

[Test Dvd]

Hi Luis,

Is it because on YouTube you can subscribe and they make money???

It is indecent what they are going to do....

[Test Dvd]

Has anyone received an email from Admob about programmatic auctions?

Talk about some limited ads.

Do you know what that is about?

[Luis Gualandi]

For anyone still putting their faith on Limited Ads, don't. Fill rate and cpm will be so pathetic you won't even be able to feed your dog with it.

I also received the  programmatic bidding email but that's too much of a "trust me bro" technique

[Marco veLi]

Guys I created a quick discord server where we can discuss gdpr solutions, feel free to join!

Discord invite: https://discord.com/invite/5UnXR4fa

[Test Dvd]

Thanks Marco veLi !

It will be of good help

[Richard Foster]

Hi just implemented this on one of my first apps I use built in idfa in admob so user sees message like please allow us to keep features free by clicking allow if they do,  they likely click consent on ump, if they do not click allow on iOS att then ump simply won't show and you will get non personalized adds

As for Android I'm going to look at placing message simi!er to iOS to encourage consent

[Test Dvd]

I don't think it will work for you because it will not show you any type of ads from 16/1 if there is no consent

[Rafael]

Not long ago the consent rate was 90%, now it is 74%, so there is some learning going on.

Even this is very high, because the data protection authority want to see a "reject all" button.

This will reduce the consent rate to 10%.

What is the future?

1. The consent rate will drop to 60% or less

2. More and more fines will come (no reject all). All big companies have it already, just the small and some mid size companies not.

3. Switch to in-app purchases/subscription or other ways (don't know which, tell me) or bye bye

Is there light?

Yes. So you can't force the user to consent. This is simply NOT ALLOWED under GDPR and you can't reduce functionality.

But some data protection authority allow to give the user an alternative choice, like "buy add free subscription or have personalized ads"

Yes, this is not forcing the user. It is a so called "choice". The user has a choice, he is not forced! This is legally a very important word.

Basically all online newspapers in my region go this route, even facebook. The 500 data protection authorities have to fight it out, if it is legal,

but it seems most promising.

When?

So Google just has to code it on to the first layer, like 1 hour work for 1 dev => 1. Buy 1,99€ subscription or 2. With ads and TCF and so on.

We're done. Depending on the implementation, but i think the newspapers have a 99% consent rate.

I think Google will do it, before the fines on small businesses kicks. Because otherwise the future is 10% consent rate.

Other scenarios?

Google does not serve ads on limited ads, will they simply do it in the future? It seems not, because they are not allowed to set

identifiers/cookies on the device = limited ads. So they can't check illegal traffic. They have to find another technical way to do it,

but I don't know how. Maybe it is impossible. Another way could be that just trusted devs with 5+ years clean history get some ads

with very low eCPM. I would not bet on it. There may be also some positive law changes, but usually it just gets worse.

What do you think?

Like always: I'm not a lawyer, just my personal opinion after reading 6 months about GDPR.

[Piszok Alfréd]

I found this about whether the "reject all" button is required on the first layer or not.

https://www.technologylawdispatch.com/2023/11/cookies-tracking-online-behavioral-advertising/reject-all-button-in-cookie-consent-banners-an-update-from-the-uk-and-the-eu/

[Mr Qwak]

This is all very alarming!

Is it possible (i.e. legal and app will not be rejected) to have my app cease all functionality if consent is not given?

I'm also considering switching to alternative ad providers because of this issue; am I likely to come up against the same problem, with say, UnityAds?

Thanks.

[Marco veLi]

If anyone is interest, we created a small discord server to discuss GDPR things and more, feel free to join!

https://discord.com/invite/pngew9ex