[wg/pat] Formal Objection (charter review 2023)

From
   https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/PAT-WG-Charter/results

This charter has not changed materially since it was first submitted for 
Advisory Committee review in October 2022. The substance of the Formal 
Objections (FO) raised during that review by 51Degrees [1], [W3C Member 
1] [2], and [W3C member 2] [3] remain applicable and we include the test 
of those objections in this FO by reference. [1]

Since October 2022 evidence has been disclosed in court.

- Meeting between Tim Cook CEO of Apple and Sundar Pichai CEO of Google 
around 20th December 2018; [2]
o “Sundar also discussed our respective approaches to privacy in the 
follow on session”
o “Tim’s overall message to Google was ‘I imagine us as being able to be 
deep deep partners; deeply connected where our services end and yours 
being as sees no natural impediment to use doing more together. Knows 
there is a past but doesn’t feel encumbered by it and wants to figure 
out how we work more deeply together (and share information better – he 
stressed this a few times).”
o “Our vision is that we work as if we are one company”

Whilst Mozilla was not present at the 20th December 2018 meeting the 
majority of Mozilla Foundation’s funding comes from Google who were. As 
such there is a clear financial dependency problem between Mozilla 
Foundation and Google and it seems likely via this financial dependency 
Google have some influence over Mozilla. [3]

Within an organization where the three web browser engine vendors 
operate “as if we are one company” any debate that seeks to design 
markets, raise rival’s costs, restrict interoperability, or otherwise 
interfere with markets, must be avoided. As this group intends to engage 
in such debates, and has done so as a Community Group, the charter 
should have been ruled out of scope by W3C Team and been rejected prior 
to an AC review. [4]

Of additional consideration is Meta who along with Apple and Google have 
now been designated gatekeeper status under the Digital Markets Act 
(DMA). It is not clear to use how the work of the group can be conducted 
in a manner that complies with the DMA. [5]

The charter lacks language concerning requirements for impartiality of 
chairs and W3C Team members.

[1] https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/PATWG-charter-2022/results
[2] https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-10/417460.pdf
[3]
https://assets.mozilla.net/annualreport/2021/mozilla-fdn-2021-fs-final-1010.pdf
Page 16 - “Mozilla incorporates search engines of its customers as a 
default status or an optional status available in the Firefox web browser.”
Page 6 – Royalties for 2021 $527 million USD.
[4] 
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1raFJmEEobFzXj7VPC0GRXKtL_pxfR-5Mi6YJwtHalYg/edit#heading=h.fv36lheauhcb 
– restricting implementation to “reputable cloud provider” only is one 
overt example.
[5] 
https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/commission-designates-six-gatekeepers-under-digital-markets-act-2023-09-06_en

[1] 
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-review-comments/2024Jan/0002.html
[2] 
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-review-comments/2024Jan/0001.html
[3] 
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-review-comments/2024Jan/0003.html

Received on Wednesday, 10 January 2024 16:03:11 UTC