Re: Status of First-Party Sets - Response to Wendy

Hello,

Well, the  W3C Antitrust and Competition Guidelines
<https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2017/antitrust-guidance> bind
individual Members. It's then at their discretion to comply with that.
That's it.

LO

śr., 8 cze 2022 o 19:24 James Rosewell <james@51degrees.com> napisał(a):

> Dear Wendy,
>
>
>
> Why should matters of competition be kept out of W3C technical groups? How
> else do we ensure that the W3C Antitrust and Competition Guidelines
> <https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2017/antitrust-guidance> and
> applicable laws are being adhered to? We are not above the law.
>
>
>
> We cannot debate privacy without also considering competition among other
> consequences.
>
>
>
> It is quite common in any forum where competing market participants come
> together to talk openly about competition and markets. I find it concerning
> that the W3C is so averse to doing so.
>
>
>
> I have sought legal advice on the subject as advised under the W3C
> guidelines. As a result, I noisily highlight competition issues. For
> example; the proposal from Google concerning Topics at Improving Web
> Advertising Business Group, or interference in the economics of the web via
> the proposed Private Advertising Technologies group, or on the matter of
> First Party Sets following the decision to remove it from this group in
> relation to its continued existence in WICG. I’ve shared this advice with
> you. You have not provided any substantive response. Instead, you repeat
> requests for me to stop raising matters of competition. Why should I do so?
> Just because the subject has been “taboo” to date doesn’t mean it remains
> so.
>
>
>
> W3C are facilitating the creation of documents, like the ‘Privacy
> Principles’, which serve to support the commercial interests of many of the
> employers of the people that worked on the document, creates quasi-laws
> that condition the environment for technical innovation, do not follow
> clear guidance from regulators, and in any case do nothing to improve
> privacy in practice. Requiring people to hand over more directly
> identifiable personal data, a consequence of the ‘Privacy Principles’, does
> not improve privacy or further the mission of the W3C.  Movement for an
> Open Web (MOW), of which I’m a Director, have analysed the ‘Privacy
> Principles’ and published feedback
> <https://movementforanopenweb.com/mows-in-depth-commentary-on-the-draft-w3c-privacy-principles/>
> for W3C to consider.
>
>
>
> We now need to openly debate the competition impact of announcements and
> work on possible standards more, not less. If chairs or participants are
> uncomfortable then they need to follow the W3C Guidelines and “obtain
> appropriate legal counsel”. The W3C can assist by establishing a Legal
> Advisory Group to provide horizontal review and advise on matters including
> competition to assist the wider participants. To avoid IANAL contributions
> only qualified lawyers should be eligible to participate.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> James
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wendy Seltzer <wseltzer@w3.org>
> Sent: 06 June 2022 19:26
> To: James Rosewell <james@51degrees.com>; Kaustubha Govind <
> kaustubhag@google.com>; Theresa O'Connor <hober@apple.com>; Chris Wilson <
> cwilso@google.com>; yoavweiss@chromium.org; Léonie Watson <
> lwatson@tetralogical.com>; Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>;
> matthew.hancox@ing.com; david.verroken@ing.com
> Cc: public-privacycg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Status of First-Party Sets
>
>
>
> Dear James,
>
>
>
> I have asked you before to please keep legal argumentation out of W3C's
> technical groups. If you have something to discuss with Monitoring
> Trustees, you are free to do so in separate conversation with them.
>
>
>
> Discussion of market share is inappropriate for W3C lists as well.
>
>
>
> Please help us to keep discussions on-topic and civil.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> --Wendy
>
>
>
>
>
> On 6/4/22 03:50, James Rosewell wrote:
>
> > Adding Matthew Hancox and David Verroken in their role as Monitoring
>
> > Trustee
>
> > <https://www.gov.uk/cma-cases/investigation-into-googles-privacy-sandb
>
> > ox-browser-changes#monitoring-trustee-report>
>
> > of Google’s commitments with the CMA.
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Wendy Seltzer -- wseltzer@w3.org +1.617.715.4883 (office) Strategy Lead
> and Counsel, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
>
> https://wendy.seltzer.org/        +1.617.863.0613 (mobile)
>
>
>
>
> This email and any attachments are confidential and may also be
> privileged. If you are not the named recipient, please notify the sender
> immediately and do not disclose, use, store or copy the information
> contained herein. This is an email from 51Degrees.mobi Limited, Davidson
> House, Forbury Square, Reading, RG1 3EU. T: +44 118 328 7152; E:
> info@51degrees.com; 51Degrees.mobi Limited t/as 51Degrees.
>