W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > February 2013

RE: DNT: Agenda for Wednesday call, February 20

From: Mike O'Neill <michael.oneill@baycloud.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 15:11:29 -0000
To: "'Justin Brookman'" <jbrookman@cdt.org>
Cc: <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00f901ce0f7c$8fbb2110$af316330$@baycloud.com>
I agree, it is hard to imagine text that could successfully limit market research data gathering to the narrow societal purpose. The obvious danger is that this will become a general pass for any collection and so I concur that DNT:1 must generally mean no collection.

 

The same also applies to de-identified data. The only meaningful way to do that for web history is to aggregate data derived from the URL strings (and in-page activity) over very large “buckets” and delete the raw data including the UIDs. This could be useful for the acceptable exemptions but otherwise no collection when DNT:1 ( or unset in Europe).

 

 

Mike

 

From: Justin Brookman [mailto:jbrookman@cdt.org] 
Sent: 20 February 2013 14:29
To: Mike Zaneis; Walter van Holst
Cc: public-tracking@w3.org
Subject: Re: DNT: Agenda for Wednesday call, February 20

 

Corrected link: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Sep/0132.html

 

Sent from mobile, please excuse curtness and typos



Justin Brookman <jbrookman@cdt.org> wrote:

At the Bellevue meeting last summer, it was agreed that we would drop market research and product improvement from the standard as permitted uses.

 

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Sep/0341.html

 

I disagree with Peter's decision to reopen the issue, but I am willing to consider proposals for a narrowly crafted research exception.  There are certainly societal benefits to be realized from understanding how people surf from site to site.  For the time being, I still think that a DNT:1 signal should serve as a request to opt out of such cross-site research, and I have yet to see a proposal that does not allow for boundless collection and retention (even if for admittedly laudable purposes).

  _____  

From: Mike Zaneis [mailto:mike@iab.net]
To: Walter van Holst [mailto:walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl]
Cc: public-tracking@w3.org [mailto:public-tracking@w3.org]
Sent: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 07:15:50 -0500
Subject: Re: DNT: Agenda for Wednesday call, February 20

I'm not sure where this view that there is limited support for the market research exception comes from, aside from David Singer's recent comments, the rest of the industry participants support this exception. As Peter has pointed out, it is a vital component of the existing DAA program and we support extension to any W3C standard. Therefore, this is a very valid discussion. 

Mike Zaneis
SVP & General Counsel, IAB
(202) 253-1466


On Feb 20, 2013, at 6:53 AM, "Walter van Holst" <walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl> wrote:

> On 2/19/13 8:54 PM, Peter Swire wrote:
>> David:
>> 
>> 1. "Market research" has been proposed as a permitted use, to go into
>> the text of the spec. It is an important topic in practice for a range
>> of companies. The DAA code, which overlaps in its coverage with DNT
>> issues, has an exception/permitted use for "market research." To get
>> adoption of DNT, getting clarity on "market research" seems entirely
>> relevant.
> 
> Dear Peter,
> 
> Given the very limited support for the idea of market research (for any
> common understood idea of market research) as a permitted use in this
> group, I'm not sure whether it is beneficial to the credibility of the
> process to try to define it in this standard.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Walter
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 20 February 2013 15:12:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:45:04 UTC