Re: Issue-17, Issue-51 First party obligations

Shane, Paddy,

Facebook joined I see. 
http://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=49311&public=1&order=org

Le 2 déc. 2011 à 07:06, Shane Wiley a écrit :
> You’ve called out the most essential element of the discussion below – party position is contextual.  In your use case, if you go to flickr.yahoo.com (1st party) and log-in with your Facebook (3rd party in this context) credentials, then only the log-in event would be tracked by Facebook and not your further activities on Flickr (unless you click on a “Facebook Like” button somewhere).

I don't think it is what Facebook is doing currently.
If I'm not wrong Facebook is collecting data about users 
who are going to sites having a FB button. Not judging if 
it's right or not, but just pointing out that this will 
have impact on Facebook business model. 

And it relates still to the issue that Roy has outlined.

What is a first part site?
As long we have not defined that, we will run into circles.

I have a tendency, *as a user*, to define a first party 
Web site as an individual online service. To be clearer 
and just as examples:

* Picasa, YouTube, Google Maps, Google search engines are 
  different sites.
* Flickr, Yahoo!, Yahoo! Mail, etc. are different sites.

I think Shane disagrees with me here.

Google Maps is another interesting example of user 
interactions. According to Shane model, if a user loads 
an hotel page with a Google Maps! as long as the user 
doesn't click on the map to resize it in the page, it's a 
third party. But as soon as the user resizes it it becomes
a first party interaction ? That doesn't make sense to me.

It's interesting with Yahoo! which has local franchises 
for the brand only, but not at all operated by Yahoo! USA
such as Yahoo! Japan  [1].


[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahoo_Japan

-- 
Karl Dubost - http://dev.opera.com/
Developer Relations & Tools, Opera Software

Received on Friday, 2 December 2011 15:09:35 UTC