- From: James Rosewell via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2022 15:23:20 +0000
- To: public-patcg@w3.org
@ekr > @jwrosewell I don't understand what you are asking for. Can you please address the hypo I provided in https://github.com/patcg/patwg-charter/issues/30#issuecomment-1170107470 The Scope of the charter might read as follows. _"Scope The Working Group will consider designs that allow all participants to collaborate in providing advertising features. The purpose of these features is to support web advertising that complies with the current GDPR [list other current laws if necessary]. All participants of the group agree to licence to any party any “Data” they collect that is needed to implement designs considered by the group under Fair Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory Terms. Where the Data is classified as personal data under law use of the data by any party must be lawful. Where consent is needed to comply with laws any party – including the web browser – must obtain explicit consent from the user for use of the data. For the avoidance of doubt web browsers can not rely on consent captured at the time of browser installation. Out of Scope Advertising features that can only be implemented in part or in full by web browsers."_ Therefore, if the browsing history of a user were needed to implement a design considered by the group, and Mozilla were a member of the group having accepted the charter terms, Mozilla would have agreed to licence to any other party the Data collected by their products needed to implement designs. If the Data were personal data, then laws will apply equally to any party using the Data which might include obtaining consent for the specific purpose of advertising, or any relevant purpose associated with the design in question. This is neither controversial or unprecedented. Is the explanation now clear? @AramZS @seanturner It is extremely important to recognise that there is no requirement for a Working Group of the W3C to involve a web browser implementation. The Decentralized IDentifiers (DID) Working Group obtained [Recommendation status on 30th June 2022](https://blog.avast.com/dids-approved-w3c) for their work which does not involve any browser component despite objections from two browser vendors. There is much we can learn from DID. Note: I have focused specifically on the Scope section of the charter draft in this response. There are other issues I have with the document, such as the reference to Ethical Web Principles, that remain. However modifying the Scope section will likely point to a direction of change for the rest of the document. Importantly these modifications do not prevent those that wish to progress their proposals and ideas from doing so. They do address the substantive competition issues that the charter as drafted attracts and that the W3C does not currently have adequate guidance and process in place to address. -- GitHub Notification of comment by jwrosewell Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/patcg/patwg-charter/issues/30#issuecomment-1177785293 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 7 July 2022 15:23:21 UTC