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

Re: Today's call: summary on user agent compliance

From: Peter Cranstone <peter.cranstone@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 13:47:53 -0600
To: Tamir Israel <tisrael@cippic.ca>, Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com>
CC: Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu>, <ifette@google.com>, Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>, Jeffrey Chester <jeff@democraticmedia.org>, Ninja Marnau <nmarnau@datenschutzzentrum.de>, Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>, "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CBFCF79F.3005%peter.cranstone@gmail.com>
And there in lies the challenge of defining a user choice.

Microsoft sets the choice of ³Do Not Track²

Everyone else (Apple, Mozilla, Google, Opera, Yahoo) sets the choice to
³Tracking allowed². (In the absence of the user being notified that they can
indeed make a choice the default is to track).

So there you have it, opt-in vs. opt-out. Can you imagine the user now has a
choice. They can download a browser that by default offers more privacy or
they can chose the alternative. The real surprise comes later when they (the
consumer) find out that itıs all optional for the content provider.


Peter
___________________________________
Peter J. Cranstone


Contact information (Email is fastest)
____________________________________
Email:      peter.cranstone@gmail.com <mailto:peter.cranstone@gmail.com>
Phone:    (00 +1) 720.663.1752


From:  Tamir Israel <tisrael@cippic.ca>
Date:  Tuesday, June 12, 2012 1:30 PM
To:  Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com>
Cc:  Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu>, <ifette@google.com>, Shane Wiley
<wileys@yahoo-inc.com>, Jeffrey Chester <jeff@democraticmedia.org>, Ninja
Marnau <nmarnau@datenschutzzentrum.de>, Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>, Bjoern
Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>, W3 Tracking
<public-tracking@w3.org>
Subject:  Re: Today's call: summary on user agent compliance
Resent-From:  W3 Tracking <public-tracking@w3.org>
Resent-Date:  Tue, 12 Jun 2012 19:31:58 +0000

>     
>  Alan -- there are only 2 types of consent potentially operative here. Opt-in
> and opt-out. So I don't think I'm raising some obscure jurisdictional quirk,
> but rather a pervasive feature of data protection laws.
>  
>  My read of the EU situation is not the same as yours but regardless, if the
> EU ends up with an opt-out regime, then addressing facially valid DNT-1
> defaults becomes all the more pressing.
>  
>  Best,
>  Tamir
>  
>  On 6/12/2012 3:13 PM, Alan Chapell wrote:
>>   
>>  
>>  
>> Hi Tamir -
>>  
>> 
>>  
>>  
>> I think that's a laudable goal. However, the standard should not be looking
>> to address every possible regulatory issue at the expense of the core mission
>> of the group ­ which is to help define mechanisms for expressing user
>> preferences around Web tracking (as defined). That core mission may fit
>> really well into certain legal frameworks - and fit less well in other
>> frameworks. The uncertainty in certain jurisdictions makes this a difficult
>> proposition to say the least. I've heard respected EU privacy experts state
>> that ­ of the member states that have taken a public position on Section 5(3)
>> of ePrivacy ­ half appear to be opt-in and half appear to be opt­out for most
>> cookies.  And the UK has arguably changed its stance on the cookie issue
>> several times since our group began its work ­ and for a time had one branch
>> of government saying something vastly different from another branch.
>>  
>> 
>>  
>>  
>> I recognize that some in the group may be more optimistic regarding the time
>> it would take to harmonize this standard across multiple jurisdictions. If
>> that's the consensus of the group, so be it. If so, we may want to more
>> clearly state this in the group's charter.
>>  
>> 
>>  
>>  
>> 
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> Cheers,
>>  
>> 
>>  
>>  
>> Alan Chapell
>>  
>> Chapell & Associates
>>  
>> 917 318 8440
>>  
>> 
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> 
>>  
>>   
>> From:  Tamir Israel <tisrael@cippic.ca>
>>  Date:  Monday, June 11, 2012 8:13 PM
>>  To:  Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com>
>>  Cc:  Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu>, <ifette@google.com>, Shane Wiley
>> <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>, Jeffrey Chester <jeff@democraticmedia.org>, Ninja
>> Marnau <nmarnau@datenschutzzentrum.de>, Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>, Bjoern
>> Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>,
>> "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
>>  Subject:  Re: Today's call: summary on user agent compliance
>>  
>>  
>> 
>>  
>>  
>>   
>>  Hi Alan,
>>  
>>  Would it not be in the interests of all if this standard were able to take
>> into account as many regulatory problems for online trackers as possible?
>>  
>>  Best,
>>  Tamir
>>  
>>  On 6/11/2012 11:41 AM, Alan Chapell wrote:
>>> It seems to me that the group is spending a fair amount of time focusing on
>>> how DNT will provide a panacea to the legal uncertainty in the EU and now
>>> Canada. I'm not sure its a productive road for this group to be going down.
>>> DNT is unlikely to be the sole path to compliance in either the EU or
>>> Canada.
>>  
>>  
>>   
>  
Received on Tuesday, 12 June 2012 19:48:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:30 UTC