W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-privacy@w3.org > October to December 2012

RE: Children's online privacy.

From: Mike O'Neill <michael.oneill@baycloud.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 11:30:20 -0000
To: <public-privacy@w3.org>
Cc: "'Fred Andrews'" <fredandw@live.com>
Message-ID: <0bd101cdbcdb$46d3ae70$d47b0b50$@baycloud.com>
Fred,

 

I agree that child oriented UA s are needed, and this would tie in with a
PUA remit by defining W3C recommended features.

 

Also, the difficulty of assuming consent when the user is a child is another
strong argument for privacy by default.

 

I also think it would be a good idea to standardise capabilities to help
parents restrict access to porn sites etc., either through blocking in a
child oriented UA or (better) an explicit indication to websites of a
child's legal status (along with some future COPPA+ style legislation
requiring websites to take notice).

 

Mike

 

From: Fred Andrews [mailto:fredandw@live.com] 
Sent: 07 November 2012 02:55
To: public-privacy@w3.org
Subject: Children's online privacy.

 

Note sure if this has come up before but there is some interesting
discussion about FTC rules relating to online privacy for children:

Here are the proposed changes:
http://ftc.gov/os/2012/08/120801copparule.pdf

NY Times article:
https://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/06/technology/silicon-valley-objects-to-onli
ne-privacy-rule-proposals-for-children.html

Slashdot
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/11/06/2239233/a-trail-of-clicks-culminating
-in-conflict

Apple's response:
http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/copparulereview2012/561789-00096-84317.pdf

IAB comments:
http://www.iab.net/media/file/IAB-Comments-COPPA-Rule-Review-16-CFR-Part-312
-Project-No-P104503.pdf

ACT comments:
http://actonline.org/pressreleases/2012/09/26/ftc-taxes-apps-privacy-changes
-result-in-quarter-billion-dollar-cost-to-education-app-developers/

The responses are interesting.  There is the 'show us the harm' tactic, the
'we don't control the platform' excuse, the 'damage to the economy' tactic,
the 'destroy the market' tactic, the 'we have it all under control' tactic.
Sound familiar.

Part of my motivation for the PUA CG work is from seeing children today
using what has become a spyware platform.  Most of the  web apps I see very
young children using need no web access at all, apart from downloading their
resources, and could well be run in a sandbox, avoiding many of the
collection issues.  You see children being forced to sign up for email
accounts just to download free apps (Windows 8 cough) and being channeled
into using cloud storage.   What legacy is this to leave to the next
generation?

I am quite hopeful that the PUA CG can deliver a platform that limits the UA
monitoring in children's web applications.  I would like to let the FTC know
that their concerns are not being ignored in the web platform, but my
'diplomatic' skills are a little challenged.

cheers
Fred
Received on Wednesday, 7 November 2012 11:30:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 11:31:00 GMT