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

Re: A Contingency Plan for Winding Up the Working Group

From: Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 08:00:36 -0400
To: Jeffrey Chester <jeff@democraticmedia.org>, Peter Swire <peter@peterswire.net>
CC: Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>, "public-tracking@w3.org Group WG" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CDE471D3.33423%achapell@chapellassociates.com>
Thanks Jeff.

I'd like to see us continue to work diligently towards a last call document
next month. The June document circulated by Peter is a good start, but we've
got a lot of work in front of us to address outstanding issues.

Alan

From:  Jeffrey Chester <jeff@democraticmedia.org>
Date:  Friday, June 14, 2013 8:30 AM
To:  Peter Swire <peter@peterswire.net>
Cc:  Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>,
"public-tracking@w3.org Group WG" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Subject:  Re: A Contingency Plan for Winding Up the Working Group
Resent-From:  <public-tracking@w3.org>
Resent-Date:  Fri, 14 Jun 2013 12:31:09 +0000

> Peter:
> 
> I agree with Jonathan.  I fear we are not meeting the expectations that global
> users had for a meaningful way to reduce some of the data collection and
> tracking which is at the core of the online marketing business model (let
> alone the NSA!)
> 
> While I remain committed to further discussion, it is clear there will likely
> be no meaningful agreement to protect user privacy (even in the very limited
> context we have addressed).
> 
> 
> Jeff
> 
> Center for Digital Democracy
> 1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Suite 550
> Washington, DC 20009
> www.democraticmedia.org <http://www.democraticmedia.org>
> www.digitalads.org <http://www.digitalads.org>
> 202-986-2220
> 
> On Jun 14, 2013, at 5:54 AM, Peter Swire wrote:
> 
>> I am working with W3C colleagues to have an update about our thinking about
>> process/schedule to you today.
>> 
>> Peter
>> 
>> Prof. Peter P. Swire
>> C. William O'Neill Professor of Law
>> Ohio State University
>> 240.994.4142
>> www.peterswire.net <http://www.peterswire.net>
>> 
>> Beginning August 2013:
>> Nancy J. and Lawrence P. Huang Professor
>> Law and Ethics Program
>> Scheller College of Business
>> Georgia Institute of Technology
>> 
>> 
>> From:  Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu>
>> Date:  Friday, June 14, 2013 1:53 AM
>> To:  David Singer <singer@apple.com>
>> Cc:  "public-tracking@w3.org Group WG" <public-tracking@w3.org>
>> Subject:  Re: A Contingency Plan for Winding Up the Working Group
>> Resent-From:  <public-tracking@w3.org>
>> Resent-Date:  Friday, June 14, 2013 1:54 AM
>> 
>>  
>>  David, 
>> 
>> Participants in the working group have frequently proposed agenda items and
>> estimated consensus on issues.  I'm not sure what would be different about
>> evaluating and adopting a contingency plan.
>> 
>> Moreover, there's working group precedent for contingency planning.  Some
>> time ago members of the group proposed tabling a component of our charter,
>> Tracking Selection Lists, for lack of consensus.  And we did.
>> 
>> Best,
>> Jonathan
>> 
>>  
>> On Thursday, June 13, 2013 at 10:26 PM, David Singer wrote:
>>  
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>> 
>>> On Jun 13, 2013, at 9:19 PM, Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> Colleagues,
>>>> 
>>>> We first met to discuss Do Not Track over 2 years ago. We have now held 10
>>>> in-person meetings and 78 conference calls. We have exchanged 7,148 emails.
>>>> And those boggling figures reflect just the official fora.
>>>> 
>>>> The group remains at an impasse.
>>> 
>>> No, alas, that is what you would like to believe, and what you tell others.
>>> 
>>> Determination of consensus, impasse, and alternative routes ahead are
>>> primarily the responsibility of the chairs.  It is perhaps kind of you to
>>> assume their role, but there is still work remaining for us mere delegates
>>> to do.
>>> 
>>> Thanks, nonetheless
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> We have sharpened issues, and we have made some progress on low-hanging
>>>> fruit. But we still have not resolved our longstanding key disagreements,
>>>> including: What information can websites collect, retain, and use? What
>>>> sorts of user interfaces and defaults are compliant, and can websites
>>>> ignore noncompliant browsers?
>>>> 
>>>> Our Last Call deadline is July 2013. That due date was initially January
>>>> 2012. Then April 2012. Then June 2012. Then October 2012. We are 18 months
>>>> behind schedule, with no end in sight.
>>>> 
>>>> There must come a stopping point. There must come a time when we agree to
>>>> disagree. If we cannot reach consensus by next month, I believe we will
>>>> have arrived at that time.
>>>> 
>>>> I would make two proposals for next Wednesday's call. First, that we commit
>>>> to not punting our July deadline. If we have not attained agreement on Last
>>>> Call documents, we should wind up the working group. Second, that we begin
>>>> planning a responsible contingency process for winding up the working group
>>>> if we miss our deadline.
>>>> 
>>>> Let me be clear: I am not proposing that we halt our work. I plan to
>>>> continue collaborating in good faith right up until our deadline. I remain
>>>> committed to Do Not Track as a uniform, persistent, easy-to-use, and
>>>> effective control over collection of a consumer's browsing history. I
>>>> believe a consensus Do Not Track standard is the best possible outcome for
>>>> all stakeholders in the web ecosystem. But I also believe prudence dictates
>>>> some planning for foreseeable alternative outcomes.
>>>> 
>>>> Sincerely,
>>>> Jonathan
>>>> 
>>>> (Speaking only for himself, as usual.)
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>   
>>>      
>>   
>>  
>>  
>>  
> 
Received on Monday, 17 June 2013 12:01:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:47 UTC