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

RE: Letter from Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch, Federal Trade Commission

From: Craig Spiezle <craigs@otalliance.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 15:58:45 -0700
To: "'Peter Cranstone'" <peter.cranstone@gmail.com>, "'Delaney, Elizabeth A'" <EDELANEY@ftc.gov>, <public-tracking@w3.org>
Cc: "'Vandecar, Kim'" <KVANDECAR@ftc.gov>, "'Thompson, Kimberly M.'" <kthompson@ftc.gov>
Message-ID: <043901cd4f38$4013e160$c03ba420$@otalliance.org>
There are a few unique scenarios we may want to review for any exceptions or
variations to this position.  Do any of the following make a difference?   

 

US

1.       Users updates  their browser.  (I am unclear if IE 10 will be
backward compatible with Windows 7)

2.       User buys a new PC (Windows 8 and IE 10 pre-installed)

3.       User Upgrades their PC and purchases Windows 8 with IE 10)

 

EU - impact with the browser selection screen

1.       Users updated their browser.  (I am unclear if IE 10 will be
backward compatible with Windows 7)

2.       User buys a new PC (Windows 8 and selects IE 10)

3.       User Upgrades their PC and purchases Windows 8 and select IE 10)

 

 

 

From: Peter Cranstone [mailto:peter.cranstone@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 3:42 PM
To: Delaney, Elizabeth A; 'public-tracking@w3.org'
Cc: Vandecar, Kim; Thompson, Kimberly M.
Subject: Re: Letter from Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch, Federal Trade
Commission

 

Elizabeth,

 

RE: "Microsoft not consumers will be exercising the choice as to what signal
the browser will send".

 

I have to disagree. Microsoft made a public announcement of the browser
setting. I knew that when I installed the software. The Microsoft default
was my choice when I installed the software, and they also provided me with
a way to change my choice if need be.

 

RE: "But it does not solve the fact that the recipients of the signal must
still choose to honor the signal and refrain from tracking consumers and/or
collecting data about them". 

 

In essence it does solve the fact. A server as per the spec that is said to
be honoring the DNT setting MUST refrain from tracking consumers and/or
collecting data about them. What the spec does NOT resolve is the following:

 

If said server receives a DNT:1 setting that the server believes is coming
from an invalid browser (by the way there is no such thing as an invalid DNT
setting because it's binary) then it MAY chose to ignore that setting.

 

The dilemma is now apparent. The user has expressed his/her choice by
sending valid DNT setting - the server has now also made a choice, to not
honor it. Therefore it MUST respond to the user indicating it's status. 

 

The current spec reads with the word "MAY" respond. This is inadequate and
opens up a wealth of legal responses all of which are not good. DNT is
binary - if you see the 1 setting and you support honoring that setting then
you MUST do as it says. If you lack sufficient context about "WHO" made that
setting (Microsoft, Me or other 3rd party software) then you MUST request
more data from the user.

 

 


Peter
___________________________________
Peter J. Cranstone
720.663.1752

 

From: "Delaney, Elizabeth A" <EDELANEY@ftc.gov>
Date: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 11:11 AM
To: W3 Tracking <public-tracking@w3.org>
Cc: "Vandecar, Kim" <KVANDECAR@ftc.gov>, "Thompson, Kimberly M."
<kthompson@ftc.gov>
Subject: Letter from Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch, Federal Trade Commission
Resent-From: W3 Tracking <public-tracking@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 20:31:06 +0000

 

Dear Members of the W3C Tracking Protection Working Group:

 

Please see the attached letter from Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch.    Please
let us know if you have any questions.  Thank you,

 

 

Elizabeth Delaney

Attorney Advisor

Office of Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch

Federal Trade Commission

600 Pennsylvania Ave NW

Washington, DC  20580

202-326-2903

 

 
Received on Wednesday, 20 June 2012 22:59:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:31 UTC