Skip to content
[↗] dinnerplate.

Owner legal review and sources

Last updated October 18, 2026

This is an implementation review, not legal advice or a promise of immunity from claims. Public policy text must match the actual operation. A qualified adviser should assess the operator’s location, audience, business activity, and applicable law.

Current assessment

The code review found no application-added advertising, analytics, or marketing-cookie integration. A generic consent banner would not resolve the separate hosting-provider or licensing questions below. Requested project/notes storage and preference storage have different purposes. Preference storage now has a simple opt-out in Settings; it preserves projects and notes. This is an implementation assessment, not a determination that a consent exception applies in every country or that all hosting behavior has been audited.

The 2026 ICO guidance describes exceptions for requested functionality and certain preference-based appearance storage, with transparency and an easy objection where required. If optional tracking, advertising, or other non-exempt storage is introduced, obtain any required consent before activating it, and provide a meaningful refusal/withdrawal mechanism. Reassess the actual audience and the rules of each relevant region.

Implemented

Unresolved owner actions

Primary research sources

Latest review: ICO storage exceptions and objection requirements · FSF corresponding-source guidance · FFmpeg licensing checklist · FTC COPPA guidance · DOJ web accessibility guidance.

Reviewed October 18, 2026. Rules and operational facts can change. Bundled source/provenance inventory.