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

RE: Towards a Grand Compromise

From: Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2012 14:28:44 -0700
To: "rob@blaeu.com" <rob@blaeu.com>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <63294A1959410048A33AEE161379C8023D18786A93@SP2-EX07VS02.ds.corp.yahoo.com>
Rob,

I wouldn't state it that way as I don't believe we're speaking in absolutes (ZERO value vs. ZERO data collection).  I believe DNT is superior to the existing opt-out cookie structure (albeit that is a fair and good one) in several ways:

 - Users gain a consistent, local tool to communicate their opt-out preference (avoids property specific opt-out pages)
 - The user's choice is persistent for each device/UA (avoids accidental deletion)
 - Outside of Security purposes, the user will no longer experience alterations to their online experiences derived from multi-site activity (no profiling <aka "tracking"> and extends beyond online behavioral advertising)
 - Only minimal data is retained for necessary business operations and retention periods are transparent to users (Internet remains a viable ecosystem for free content)
 - All “harms” are removed (outside of government intrusion risk where there are no documented cases of this occurring with 3rd party anonymous log file data)

I hope you agree this advances the already established opt-out program offered to users with many key new additions and evolved perspectives to what was already a long and hard negotiated outcome for users of the current Internet.  The online privacy debate did not begin with the W3C Tracking Protection Working Group and most definitely won't end with it.  

I believe the proposal we've put forward is a win-win for both sides although neither side will ever be completely happy with it as advocates didn't get to solve all online privacy issues in a single pass and industry has many changes to make to meet the existing proposal.

- Shane


-----Original Message-----
From: Rob van Eijk [mailto:rob@blaeu.com] 
Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2012 2:08 PM
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Subject: RE: Towards a Grand Compromise

Shane,

If your position is, and correct me if I read this wrong, that a user 
shouldn't visit a site if (s)he is unhappy with the 3rd parties on that 
site, then we have arrived at a added value of DNT of ZERO in comparison 
to the current opt-out system. It this truly your current position?

Rob

Shane Wiley schreef op 2012-06-17 21:19:
> Tamir,
>
> The 1st party you're interacting with has decided to engage with that
> 3rd party to monetize the free content you consume (for the most 
> part,
> Ad Exchanges complicate that a bit).  If you're unhappy with the 3rd
> parties the 1st party is engaged with then don't visit that 1st party
> - or complain so they move to different 3rd parties.  Stealing 
> content
> should not be an option.
>
> - Shane

Received on Sunday, 17 June 2012 21:29:30 UTC

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