W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking-international@w3.org > February 2013

Re: Agenda: Global considerations F2F meeting 11-12 Berlin

From: Aleecia M. McDonald <aleecia@aleecia.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 17:34:04 -0800
Cc: David Wainberg <david@networkadvertising.org>, Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>, Haakon Bratsberg <haakonfb@opera.com>, "public-tracking-international@w3.org" <public-tracking-international@w3.org>, Mike Zaneis <mike@iab.net>, "Marc Groman - NAI" <mgroman@networkadvertising.org>
Message-Id: <7362AF75-35DB-48EF-86FD-8608D7CB449C@aleecia.com>
To: Chris Mejia <chris.mejia@iab.net>
Hi Chris,

Thanks for excerpting more context at the bottom, as well as being specific on your concern. That's helpful. If you will please look at what I wrote, I was not offering my view on the state of Canadian law. I was reiterating what we heard at the first workshop, implicitly explaining why likely we have not seen very much Canadian involvement to date, and explicitly suggesting involvement now would not be a productive use of time. The slides from the workshop are available online [1]. The contemporaneous summary of the presentation [2] reads, in full:

	Andrew Patrick from the Canadian Office of the Privacy Commissioner (slides) provided the provocative slide that current Web tracking was breaking the law in Canada and argued against letting trackers off the hook too easily.

I think that you will find that congruent with the summary I offered, and both seem to match the slides. 

If you believe the presentation from the Canadian Office of the Privacy Commissioner was originally inaccurate, or if things have changed over time, that's worth noting your view. That your legal counsel in Canada agrees is also interesting, and good for me (and likely others) to hear. Thank you for taking the time to have that conversation, and for sharing the results. 

I believe I accurately conveyed the highlights of the meeting. You seem to claim below that I did not. You might confirm with others who attended, but the texts do support me here rather strongly. One of the things I have tried to do is be very sure to keep summaries of events as reality-based as humanly possible. Again, feel free to disagree with the speaker, but my summary of the presentation at Princeton seems on the mark. 

Could you explain what you mean by the word "threatening"? I've re-read the message I sent and cannot figure out where that part comes from. Also, I do not understand what you mean by not-so-veiled accusations. I summarized a talk, a thing that happened two years ago. Where is your threat? 


[1] http://www.w3.org/2011/track-privacy/slides/Patrick.pdf opens with a slide that reads, in full, "web trackers are breaking the law*" and then goes on to discuss nuance in future slides.
[2] http://www.w3.org/2011/track-privacy/report.html

On Feb 25, 2013, at 2:58 PM, Chris Mejia <chris.mejia@iab.net> wrote:

> Aleecia,
> This comment from you concerns me:
> "...the Canadian view is very simple. Tracking of the sort we discuss in DNT is simply illegal. Putting user choice and control around it makes no sense; companies must just stop breaking Canadian laws."
> When you wrote "illegal," what Canadian laws/legislation were you referring to exactly?  I'm not aware of these laws, and I've just checked with industry legal counsel in Canada to be sure.  But certainly, if the good industry folks in Canada are "breaking Canadian laws" as you assert here in this very public forum, I think they deserve to understand the substance of your not so veiled accusations.  Please advise.
> Rigo-- this unfortunate example illustrates my earlier point perfectly.  People in the current working group THINK they are representing other global stake holders adequately, when in fact those stake holders being "represented" would be shocked to learn that they are in fact, not represented well at all.  Please either change the name of the group and the goals of the initiative to reflect it's current makeup, or get the right folks in the room.
> Chris
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Chris Mejia
> Digital Supply Chain Solutions
> Ad Technology Group
> Interactive Advertising Bureau - IAB
> On Feb 25, 2013, at 1:31 PM, "Aleecia M. McDonald" <aleecia@aleecia.com> wrote:
>> From what we know of other nations, we heard at the first workshop prior to the formation of the TPWG that the Canadian view is very simple. Tracking of the sort we discuss in DNT is simply illegal. Putting user choice and control around it makes no sense; companies must just stop breaking Canadian laws.
Received on Tuesday, 26 February 2013 01:35:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:40:17 UTC