The cookie law is fine, the problem is with companies who maliciously comply with it (and often "comply" with it in a way that doesn't actually comply at all).
It's sort of like how telcos in America like to comply with various sales taxes by… making something up and adding a line item to your bill purporting to be taxes, but really it's just them charging you for no reason.
Is it fine ? As a user, I consider that it's OK for websites to track my activity. This is true for every single website in the world. Is there any way for me to indicate that preference anywhere in the current framework ?
The complain here is that it's too complex to opt out of the tracking. But I have no way of opting out of that fake "protection" framework, which I consider to be useless and wrong. None at all.
As made extensively clear by the pencil pusher who came up with this grand idea of mandating an interruption for every single website I visit: those are my data. I want to have the freedom of letting websites track me if they want to, I don't need them to ask me. Give me any way to do that, and I'll be happy. But that was explicitly prevented.
The EU seems to think they know what's best for me, and won't let me make my own choices. It really doesn't, and rather than accepting that fact and giving me the freedom they claim to defend, they would rather annoy me.
So I'll keep on clicking on "Accept All" for the years to come cursing the hours of brain time lost to make a dude feel important.
If you did try to pursue the EU, I think you would quickly meet the counter argument that there are many people who are unhappy being tracked in detail systematically without consent, and would be even more if they knew the extent of it, so it would not be ok to make your preference just be how it is for everyone.
It's sort of like how telcos in America like to comply with various sales taxes by… making something up and adding a line item to your bill purporting to be taxes, but really it's just them charging you for no reason.