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

RE: Action-157: Update logged-in consent proposal

From: JC Cannon <jccannon@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 03:59:05 +0000
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
CC: David Singer <singer@apple.com>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BB17D596C94A854E9EE4171D33BBCC810D0EF1@TK5EX14MBXC136.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
I don't feel the analogy really holds. If the submarine was actually a spaceship that the crew chose never to fly into space I would agree with you. 

If a website is designed to track its members, it provides clear notice to consumers and users agree to the tracking then the site can be compliant with DNT while ignoring the header. Explain where they are not compliant and why it would be deceptive?

JC

-----Original Message-----
From: Bjoern Hoehrmann [mailto:derhoermi@gmx.net] 
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 8:14 PM
To: Shane Wiley
Cc: David Singer; public-tracking@w3.org
Subject: Re: Action-157: Update logged-in consent proposal

* Shane Wiley wrote:
>We've been through this already.  If you send a 0 then a company knows 
>not to request an exception.  If you receive nothing but see this a DNT 
>supported browser then you wouldn't know whether to request a 
>pro-active exception or ignore the situation.  Sending 0/2 provides 
>more clarity of state.

I don't see what that has to do with the proposal "Sites MAY override a user's DNT preference if they have received explicit, informed consent to do so." Let me put it this way: I run "Track me, please!" and users of my service have given me their explicit, informed consent to track them regardless of their DNT preference settings when signing up for the service.

Would it be okay for me to say that I run my service in full compliance with all the DNT specifications? No, that would be deceptive. There is no difference between fully complying with the DNT specifications and the DNT specifications not existing, other than that I could formally, and misleadingly, claim compliance if there is a "requirement" as pro- posed (unless there are extensive requirements for sites overriding the DNT preference that I am unaware of and that the proposal does not men-
tion.)

It's akin to saying that submarines comply with space travel regulations if they cannot travel in outer space.
--
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Tuesday, 1 May 2012 03:59:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:28 UTC