Re: Issue-39: Tracking of Geographic Data

Reminder: we had a fairly lengthy discussion about geoIP in the context of how identifying zip plus 4 is (about 12 households) and had a general sense that it is hard to claim there is no tracking if you can identify location that closely. I can pull the call minutes and/or prior email threads where Shane argues against zip plus 4 being ok if that is helpful context.

	Aleecia

On Dec 15, 2011, at 8:15 PM, Amy Colando (LCA) wrote:

> Is it perhaps the concept of across sites, over time? I think this is what Jeff is getting at too, when he talks about multiple data sources.
> 
> If ad network just uses the IP address that accompanies HTTP request to provide relevant content or ads, OK. If ad network remembers it in a profile it retain about you based on cross site activity, that is not OK, when DNT signal is sent (absent some other exception).
> 
> Yes?  
> 
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> From: Karl Dubost
> Sent: 12/15/2011 7:28 PM
> To: Bjoern Hoehrmann
> Cc: public-tracking@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Issue-39:  Tracking of Geographic Data
> 
> 
> Le 15 déc. 2011 à 21:45, Bjoern Hoehrmann a écrit :
> >  I do not see the connection there to dnt and ad selection. You seemed to be saying that, if you have dnt enabled, you should not get ads based on where some ad-network thinks your IP-address belongs to geographically
> 
> nope. not what I meant. I'm trying to find a better way 
> to express the cross-data aggregation around IP geolocation. 
> 
> -- 
> Karl Dubost - http://dev.opera.com/
> Developer Relations & Tools, Opera Software