Re: Proposed Text for Local Law and Public Purpose

Hi Walter,

Thanks very much for sharing your background-- naturally, it is indeed very useful to understand your background and experience when determining the context of your assertions.  My background/profile/experience can be found here, if your or anyone else cares to understand who I am and where I come from:  LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/chrismejia

To your case in point, here are your words: "I am starting to wonder how an US entity can remain Safe Harbour certified when complying with the equally self-regulatory MRC guidelines."  You have made this broad sweeping assessment with seemingly little investment in understanding how the MRC actually conducts is business of auditing, how it addresses privacy concerns, and how the online advertising industry in general actually operates.  So yes, without understanding the full context of these things, I can see how one might leap to seemingly "logical" interpretations.  After all, many folks once believed that the world was flat, logically.  And we know now that their belief was rooted in ignorance.

I have invited you and others to contact the MRC and do real due diligence (real research) before whimsically passing what you believe to be logical judgments, or even hinting at them as you have done here publicly.  To my knowledge, no one has done that yet (other than me)-- have you?  As a participant in the MRC auditing review process for 2-years, I have offered myself and my knowledge to this working group—despite this, where there seems to be misunderstanding, I have asked for the topic to be discussed via a phone call.  I just cant understand why having a phone call on this topic, to clear any misinterpretations/misunderstandings, has been pushed back on?  Maybe I'm old fashioned?

Chris

Chris Mejia | Digital Supply Chain Solutions | Ad Technology Group | Interactive Advertising Bureau - IAB

On 10/24/12 10:16 AM, "Walter van Holst" <walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl<mailto:walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl>> wrote:

On 10/24/12 3:48 PM, Chris Mejia wrote:
Walter, you seem to pass judgement quickly on entities and practices you
don't fully understand.  What experience do you have with the MRC again?
Advertising industry experience?  Understanding your background may help
me (and others) understand your assertions here.

You also seem to be awfully quick to frame people in terms of their
institutional background/perceived interest. Taking their mails at face
value may provide credibility to your assertions of interest in a civil
discourse.

Case in point: I have never expressed any opinions on how the MRC
guidelines should be interpreted. Only mentioned that a logical
consequence of your interpretation of the MRC might be non-compliance
with the Safe Harbour regime. Which will not be relevant to everyone in
the advertising business, but several entities at this table are Safe
Harbour certified _and_ claim to adhere to the MRC guidelines, so I
think it is a valid question to bring up in this context.

Could you point out where I have been passing judgement on the MRC
and/or their guidelines and/or any interpretation thereof? I'll be the
first to apologise if I have.


Also for the sake of transparency:

I am invited based on my affiliaton to Vrijschrift, a small Dutch
grassroots NGO interested in civil liberties in the digital context. As
part of that I have served on the board of European Digital Rights.

By day I am an IT-lawyer, mostly involved with IT-procurement issues,
and therefore have no direct professional interests in DNT. As part of
that role I am however consulted regularly on Data Protection and Safe
Harbour matters.

Before that I was a programmer/business analyst with Logica, in the
Dutch telecommunications division of that systems integrator.

I have masters degrees from the Rotterdam School of Management and the
Rotterdam School of Law, both part of the Erasmus University.

Does that little cv answer your question?

Regards,

Walter