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

Re: Issue 115, exemptions, best practices

From: Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 17:26:06 -0500
To: Jeffrey Chester <jeff@democraticmedia.org>, Kevin Smith <kevsmith@adobe.com>
CC: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CB5B0243.13D7B%achapell@chapellassociates.com>
Sorry for falling off on this. Let's try to set some time to discuss prior
to Wednesday's group call.

I think I at least understand your larger goal, and I certainly don't want
to encourage fraudulent behavior, but it seems to me that regulators in each
jurisdiction have and will continue to weigh in on what they see as false or
deceptive behavior. So I'm not sure why we should try to setup a broad,
pan-world standard on what constitutes fraudulent disclosures made by
websites in this forum. Moreover, (and apologies for sounding like a broken
record) I'm having trouble understanding how how smaller websites are going
to be in a position to implement what you're suggesting without hiring a
team of lawyers and technicians.

 
Cheers,

Alan Chapell
Chapell & Associates
917 318 8440


From:  Jeffrey Chester <jeff@democraticmedia.org>
Date:  Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:37:16 -0500
To:  Kevin Smith <kevsmith@adobe.com>
Cc:  "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)"
<public-tracking@w3.org>
Subject:  Re: Issue 115, exemptions, best practices
Resent-From:  <public-tracking@w3.org>
Resent-Date:  Thu, 09 Feb 2012 19:38:05 +0000

Thanks.  I believe it is fair for a site to say that a user cannot have
access to its content in the absence of a meaningful (to the site)
exchange/transaction.  But if a user has enabled DNT:1, and their intent is
not to be tracked, best practices should be employed for the site as they
try to convince the user to authorize data use.  And you are right that I
would like to see a system where users are treated fairly so they can make
the decision making in a rationale way, even on digital media time.

The landing page example I gave is on when the request to over-ride DNT: 1
has been optimized through range of non-transparent techniques (inc.
eye-tracking, for example) designed to facilitate an opt-in.  I am certain
we can balance out a users interest and monetization concerns.

Now when a user goes on most, if not all, sites, they aren't informed about
the data practices (first and third party data profiling and use
integration; ad exchange auction, real time creative optimization, etc.]
They would need to be presented with reasonable facts in a web friendly way
[not the icon!] so they can decide.  I am happy to work with you and others
on the "to do" list, so we can accomplish both monetization and privacy.

I appreciate your leadership on this issue.


Jeffrey Chester
Center for Digital Democracy
1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Suite 550
Washington, DC 20009
www.democraticmedia.org <http://www.democraticmedia.org>
www.digitalads.org <http://www.digitalads.org>
202-986-2220

On Feb 9, 2012, at 2:12 PM, Kevin Smith wrote:

> Jeffrey, I would really be interested to hear what experience you would want a
> user with DNT:1 enabled to have when visiting a publisher¹s website.  I
> understand your concern about pressuring visitors into exceptions.  However, a
> site has to have the right to not give content away for free.  Even a 404
> error page stating that a site is not available to visitors with DNT enabled
> would fall under the blanket condition ³A site should not use a special
> landing page that has been designed principally to convert a user to agree to
> permit an exemption².
>  
> How do you believe a site should express its desire to monetize a visitor or
> its desire to not show content to a visitor it cannot monetize adequately?
> You have provided a list of best practices for what NOT to do.  Can you
> provide a list of best practices for what TO do?  Perhaps the two lists
> together might make a better starting point for discussion.
>  
> From: Jeffrey Chester [mailto:jeff@democraticmedia.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 12:06 PM
> To: public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)
> Subject: Issue 115, exemptions, best practices
>  
>  https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/115
>  
> [I await input from Ninja, Alan and Jim]
> 
> 
> 
> Best Practices for sites to manage exemptions should include:
> 
> A site must provide accurate information to users on the actual data
> collection and use practices of the site.  This should include all information
> used for tracking, targeting, sales of profiles.
> A site should not suggest that the ability to access information is dependent
> on blanket acceptance of a site's data practices.
> A site should not use "immersive" multimedia applications designed to foster
> opt-in as a way to encourage a user agreeing to an exemption.
> A site should not use a special landing page that has been designed
> principally to convert a user to agree to permit an exemption.
> A site should not use social media marketing to urge a user to ask their
> "friends" to approve exemptions.
> A site should not offer rewards and incentives for a user to approve of an
> exemption.
Received on Friday, 10 February 2012 22:26:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:44:45 UTC