W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > February 2012

RE: Fate-sharing for ad behavioral targeting and other forms of personalization (ISSUE-36)

From: Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 15:38:01 -0800
To: John Simpson <john@consumerwatchdog.org>, Tom Lowenthal <tom@mozilla.com>
CC: Bryan Sullivan <blsaws@gmail.com>, Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu>, JC Cannon <jccannon@microsoft.com>, "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <63294A1959410048A33AEE161379C8023D0C8AC13A@SP2-EX07VS02.ds.corp.yahoo.com>
I believe the first sentence is already covered elsewhere in the documents.  Would it be okay to simply add this statement to existing preambles?

"These requirements are not specific to behavioral advertising."

This statement doesn't do a very good job of truly expressing the balance of focus though (primarily focused on OBA/profiling across sites, but also includes other cross site data collection as well).  Perhaps not a material issue...

- Shane

From: John Simpson [mailto:john@consumerwatchdog.org]
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2012 3:51 PM
To: Tom Lowenthal
Cc: Bryan Sullivan; Shane Wiley; Jonathan Mayer; JC Cannon; public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)
Subject: Re: Fate-sharing for ad behavioral targeting and other forms of personalization (ISSUE-36)

Agree with Tom's proposed text.

On Jan 31, 2012, at 4:53 PM, Tom Lowenthal wrote:


ISSUE-36 Action-63

Proposed text:

"This standard provides general requirements on data collection, use,
and disclosure. These requirements are not specific to behavioral
advertising."

On 01/26/2012 07:29 PM, Bryan Sullivan wrote:

I agree, either a direct statement such as suggested or

"This standard does not single out any particular use of data for special
treatment under DNT, other than the cases of specific exemption."


But I like Shane's wording better.

On 1/26/12 6:59 AM, "Shane Wiley" <wileys@yahoo-inc.com<mailto:wileys@yahoo-inc.com>> wrote:

Then I would suggest state just that then:

"The standard does not single out behavioral advertising for special
treatment."

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Mayer [mailto:jmayer@stanford.edu]
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 3:54 PM
To: JC Cannon
Cc: Shane Wiley; public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org> (public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org>)
Subject: Re: Fate-sharing for ad behavioral targeting and other forms of
personalization (ISSUE-36)

This text is not intended to prohibit or allow anything.  It only
clarifies that the standard does not single out behavioral advertising
for any special treatment.

On Jan 26, 2012, at 3:44 PM, JC Cannon wrote:

I agree with Shane. Personalization based on demographics or
organizational membership could also be permitted.

JC

-----Original Message-----
From: Shane Wiley [mailto:wileys@yahoo-inc.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 6:27 AM
To: Jonathan Mayer
Cc: public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org> (public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org>)
Subject: RE: Fate-sharing for ad behavioral targeting and other forms
of personalization (ISSUE-36)

I disagree with a general prohibition on any personalization based on
DNT which the current text would suggest.  For example, geo-location or
context.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Mayer [mailto:jmayer@stanford.edu]
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 3:24 PM
To: Shane Wiley
Cc: public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org> (public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org>)
Subject: Re: Fate-sharing for ad behavioral targeting and other forms
of personalization (ISSUE-36)

We haven't defined tracking in the document, and I see no reason to add
a dependency here.

On Jan 26, 2012, at 3:21 PM, Shane Wiley wrote:

Friendly amendment:

"This standard does not differentiate between personalization for
advertisement targeting and other uses of personalization based on
tracking."

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Mayer [mailto:jmayer@stanford.edu]
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 3:13 PM
To: public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org> (public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org>)
Subject: Fate-sharing for ad behavioral targeting and other forms of
personalization (ISSUE-36)

Proposed text:

"This standard does not differentiate between personalization for
advertisement targeting and other uses of personalization."

And making this issue CLOSED.














----------
John M. Simpson
Consumer Advocate
Consumer Watchdog
1750 Ocean Park Blvd. ,Suite 200
Santa Monica, CA,90405
Tel: 310-392-7041
Cell: 310-292-1902
www.ConsumerWatchdog.org<http://www.ConsumerWatchdog.org>
john@consumerwatchdog.org<mailto:john@consumerwatchdog.org>
Received on Wednesday, 1 February 2012 23:39:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:44:44 UTC