- From: Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 12:27:02 -0700
- To: Mike Zaneis <mike@iab.net>, "Aleecia M. McDonald" <aleecia@aleecia.com>
- CC: "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Agreed - and it felt everyone on the call yesterday also agreed. Is it possible to consider this particular question decided and leave it to anyone who disagrees to come forward? Thank you, Shane Shane Wiley VP, Privacy & Data Governance Yahoo! -----Original Message----- From: public-tracking-request@w3.org [mailto:public-tracking-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Mike Zaneis Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 8:20 AM To: Aleecia M. McDonald Cc: public-tracking@w3.org Subject: Re: Proposed language for first-party websites We would support the first party exemption from DNT. Mike Zaneis SVP & General Counsel, IAB (202) 253-1466 On Oct 4, 2011, at 5:48 PM, "Aleecia M. McDonald" <aleecia@aleecia.com> wrote: > Thanks to Jonathan for getting through his open actions and kicking off discussion. > > Quiet as mice... What do you all say to his proposed language for third- and first-party websites? Should I take silence as unanimous agreement? > > Aleecia > > On Oct 3, 2011, at 7:41 PM, Jonathan Mayer wrote: > >> (ACTION-11, ISSUE-17, and ISSUE-51) >> >> First-Party Requirements: >> This standard imposes no requirements on first-party websites. A first-party website MAY take steps to protect user privacy in responding to a Do Not Track request. >> > >
Received on Thursday, 6 October 2011 19:29:28 UTC