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

Re: Proposed Text for Local Law and Public Purpose

From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 17:49:31 +0200
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Cc: Chris Mejia <chris.mejia@iab.net>, John Simpson <john@consumerwatchdog.org>, Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu>, "Dobbs, Brooks" <Brooks.Dobbs@kbmg.com>, Kimon Zorbas <vp@iabeurope.eu>, Jeffrey Chester <jeff@democraticmedia.org>, "Amy Colando (LCA)" <acolando@microsoft.com>, "Richard Weaver (Comscore)" <rweaver@comscore.com>
Message-ID: <1544090.xoEAKSzjD8@hegel.sophia.w3.org>
Chris, 

On Tuesday 23 October 2012 23:08:16 Chris Mejia wrote:
> John, I already answered Ed's email— it's in the record on this
> thread.

You provided one non-answer and an expert claim because you sit on a 
committee. I wait for the answer from the expert on whether, like Ed 
put it:
> So your position is that the MRC documents do require companies to
> collect linkable data about every consumer?

Neither you nor Brooks have provided an answer to that question. Is 
data collection required for all interactions or not? If not, how do 
we distinguish between those interactions where it is required and 
those where it isn't? And why can't that happen under DNT:0. As far 
as I understood, the metrics folks are pretty good in getting buy-in 
to their measurement programs. 

In the light of our general approach as laid down in the compliance 
specification, there must be due justification (necessary) of data 
collection if you want to collect even under DNT:1 (see wording in 
permitted uses). Utility consideration are not sufficient for 
"necessary" IMHO. MRC is not covered by the current permitted uses 
and would go into market research as a permitted us. (which is 
something I assume Rob will have trouble with)

If this is too complex for version one, we may just defer the MRC 
topic to later versions. And please excuse my ignorance about your 
earlier statements. I'm traveling and having hard times exploring 
the archives. As for Amy's proposal, I answer in another email. 

Finally, tuning in after an OECD meeting (marked by the extreme 
politeness of an old school international venue), I'm amazed by the 
patience of people with your tone. Congrats to everyone. Chris, note 
that by your tone you just shoot your own foot and harm your own 
credibility. Please try at least to remain more polite. 

Rigo
Received on Wednesday, 24 October 2012 15:51:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:36 UTC