It seems that even WhatsApp is not clear about what the repercussions should be of not accepting its new and controversial conditions. At the beginning of May, they released a series of measures for users who rejected their updated policy, mainly highlighting the limitations to the functions of the app . Today, however, the service backed down – for the second time – and announced that will not limit the functionality of the service to anyone , for now.
What has happened then? As explained by a WhatsApp representative to The Next Web, they fell back after having some conversations with authorities and experts on privacy issues . However, they do not specify what advice – or warnings – they received. What we do know is that their measures, and in general the decisions they have made in recent months, were harshly criticized.
“Given the recent discussions with authorities and privacy experts, we want to make it clear that we currently have no plans to limit the functionality of WhatsApp for those who still do not accept the update,” they mentioned. Of course, WhatsApp emphasizes that notices about the new conditions will continue to appear for those who still do not accept them : “We will continue to remind users from time to time about the update.”
WhatsApp is a sea of confusion
However, nothing guarantees that the above will remain in force for a long time. That is, WhatsApp could change its mind overnight, which is already a habit. First they marched with the delivery of their conditions in force —from February to May—; later they assured that, despite their first warnings, they will not eliminate accounts . The last setback is “forgetting” to limit essential functions, which would make the service practically useless.
With so many changes, and given the lack of clarity in its communication strategy, the authorities of some countries intervened in the situation. India , for example, considers that WhatsApp's new policies violate its laws. Germany, for its part, went further and prohibited WhatsApp from processing the data of people established in the country. Obviously, the only thing that this issue generates is great confusion among millions of people who use the service on a daily basis.
