- From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 02 May 2019 22:37:44 +0200
- To: public-privacy@w3.org, michael.oneill@baycloud.com
- Cc: public-tracking@w3.org
On Mittwoch, 1. Mai 2019 19:40:17 CEST Mike O'Neill wrote: > <https://spreadprivacy.com/do-not-track-act-2019/> > https://spreadprivacy.com/do-not-track-act-2019/ > The Do-Not-Track act is already in place in the EU with Art. 21 GDPR. It just isn't enforced yet. I think the DPAs currently start with the big incidents. So it will come. I already heard people saying in Brussels that it will be hard to argue tracking someone based on "legitimate interest" while the person is sending a DNT signal. In the meantime, we just need to wait for the court cases to come. Perhaps another "Schrems effect" will occur. Question is then, when will we see the DNT signal disappear from browsers? Any bets welcome. The fun part is that the EU publishing industry refuses the consent opening via DNT in the ePrivacy Regulation with the following argument : As DNT is managed within the browser, the browsers become "gatekeepers" and can be used to manipulate the masses against the complaining publishers, control their ad revenue. This is an utterly broken argumentation (for many reasons), but trying to convince them to change at the Munich media days remained a shockingly futile exercise. So it is not only Privacy (who cares for those citizens?). It is also a competition fight between new media and the former paper barons. This makes it so complex to achieve anything. If all actors involved block everything, we will end up with a lot of bureaucracy. That sounds strange, but only at a first glance: Privacy policy with processing workflow list records anyone? --Rigo
Received on Thursday, 2 May 2019 20:37:50 UTC