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

RE: Proposed Text for Local Law and Public Purpose

From: Amy Colando (LCA) <acolando@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 16:23:40 +0000
To: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>, "rob@blaeu.com" <rob@blaeu.com>
Message-ID: <81152EDFE766CB4692EA39AECD2AA5B61344D482@TK5EX14MBXC295.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Hi Rigo and Rob, the intent behind this language is certainly not to override DNT in a very broad way.  We tried to address the concern regarding contracts in the non-normative text by differentiating between existing and new contractual obligations, which is a concept we have discussed in a few face-to-face meetings.  Alternative text submissions or modifications would be helpful to move forward.

-----Original Message-----
From: Rigo Wenning [mailto:rigo@w3.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 7:38 AM
To: public-tracking@w3.org; rob@blaeu.com
Subject: Re: Proposed Text for Local Law and Public Purpose

On Wednesday 24 October 2012 00:45:41 Rob van Eijk wrote:
> On 17-10-2012 17:05, Amy Colando (LCA) wrote:
> > *Normative:*Regardless of DNT signal, information MAY be collected,  
> > retained, used and shared for complying with applicable laws, 
> > regulations, legal obligations and other public purposes, including, 
> > but not limited to, intellectual property protection, delivery of 
> > emergency services, and relevant self-regulatory verification 
> > requirements.
> 
> I  have been following this discussion from a distance. Basically the  
> proposed text overrides DNT. Not just specific, but in a very broad 
> way.

+1

Amy, mainly you can't give precedence to things that a party can create or directly influence. Laws have a legislator. If you overwrite the DNT signal by agreements between businesses, you create a contract to the detriment of third parties. At least in civil law countries this is prohibited by the "ordre public". While legal requirements may overwrite DNT, contractual obligations conceptionally can't. 

Rigo 
Received on Wednesday, 24 October 2012 16:25:11 UTC

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