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

Re: Proposed Text for Local Law and Public Purpose

From: David Wainberg <david@networkadvertising.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 14:35:03 -0400
Message-ID: <508ECC57.4020900@networkadvertising.org>
To: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joe@cdt.org>
CC: Chris Mejia <chris.mejia@iab.net>, "rob@blaeu.com" <rob@blaeu.com>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>, "Dobbs, Brooks" <brooks.dobbs@kbmg.com>
Hi Joe,

I wonder if there's fundamental discrepancy in how we all think this 
process should work. There's been absolutely no interest in detailing 
the problems we're trying to solve. It's hard to solve for something 
when we don't have good working examples of the problems we're trying to 
solve.

At the same time, advocates in the group have been asking for more and 
more detailed information about current practices in the industry. And 
those of us who represent industry have been very willing to share our 
knowledge. But if the notion is to dig deeper and deeper into the 
business practices of the online advertising industry and then decide 
whether or how or under what conditions those practices can continue, we 
should probably stop here. I know most in the industry are very 
interested in seeing a sensible policy for DNT that addresses real 
privacy concerns, and when we have that industry will adapt its 
practices accordingly, so let's focus on that.

-David

On 10/29/12 2:09 PM, Joseph Lorenzo Hall wrote:
> You can imagine how it's hard to accommodate something for which we 
> don't have a good working example. best, Joe
>
> On 10/29/12 11:55 AM, Chris Mejia wrote:
>> Hi Joe,
>>
>> Good speaking with you the other day.  I think you are headed in the 
>> right
>> direction here, but unfortunately, these audit reports are very
>> sensitive-- as they go into granular detail, exposing exact methods,
>> practices and trade secrets that are confidential and sensitive to the
>> audited party, and thus are only shared with between the audited party,
>> the 3rd party auditor, and the MRC in the strictest of confidence.  That
>> stated, there may very well be something that can be shared to benefit
>> this group, I just don't know what it would be, so I'd defer that 
>> question
>> to the MRC itself.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> Chris Mejia | Digital Supply Chain Solutions | Ad Technology Group |
>> Interactive Advertising Bureau - IAB
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/26/12 5:09 PM, "Joseph Lorenzo Hall" <joe@cdt.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Something that would be particularly valuable to methodologists like
>>> myself would be if there were an MRC/audit/whatever report that could
>>> be shared with this group in full (they presumably have a lot of
>>> proprietary and confidential information, no?). Such a thing may not be
>>> possible but it sounds like the independence of the MRC in ensuring ad
>>> quality is an important part of the ad side of this. best, Joe
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Joseph Lorenzo Hall
>>> Senior Staff Technologist
>>> Center for Democracy & Technology
>>> 1634 I ST NW STE 1100
>>> Washington DC 20006-4011
>>> (p) 202-407-8825
>>> (f) 202-637-0968
>>> joe@cdt.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Received on Monday, 29 October 2012 18:35:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:37 UTC