RE: technical, business, legal definitions

Haakon,

Agreed - but our extended Service Provider definition includes "with no independent rights to use the data outside of 1st party direction" which is fairly aligned with the general legal tenets of a Data Processor definition.

Again - open for subjective interpretation due to the lack of more detail but generally "very close".

- Shane

-----Original Message-----
From: Haakon Bratsberg [mailto:haakon.bratsberg@opera.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 7:13 PM
To: Shane Wiley
Cc: Karl Dubost; rob@blaeu.com; public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)
Subject: Re: technical, business, legal definitions

On 25. jan. 2012, at 18:53, Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:

> Generally whether expected or not, we've come close to this same structure (to some degree) with the following terms:
> 
> - 1st Party (Data Controller)
> - Service Provider (Data Processor)
> - 3rd Party (3rd Party)

I do not expect Service Provider = Data Processor to be globally true. It depends on the legal relationship between 1st Part and Service Provider. 

Haakon


> 
> - Shane
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Karl Dubost [mailto:karld@opera.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 9:57 AM
> To: rob@blaeu.com
> Cc: public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)
> Subject: technical, business, legal definitions
> 
> This morning in Bruxelles, Roy proposed to use the definitions of European commission prose about 
> 
> * Processor
> * Third Parties
> * Controller
> 
> Rob said that it was better to focus on technical definitions, than the legal, business ones of Europe. Currently, I have the feeling that our definitions are _not_ technical specifically in the compliance document. A technical definition of 1st party/3rd party in terms of the HTTP protocol will be very defined but it's not what we have done so far. 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Karl Dubost - http://dev.opera.com/
> Developer Relations, Opera Software
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 25 January 2012 18:27:54 UTC