Re: first parties

On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 5:34 PM, Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:


> With Tom's Addition:
> "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 and SHOULD improve notice with respect to DNT."
>
> I agree with the Initial Statement but feel that Tom's request was out of
> scope to suggest first parties must improve notice across the board (not
> just with respect to DNT).
>
> I would suggest the following (hopefully a winning middle-ground):
> "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 and SHOULD provide appropriate notice in what manner
> they support Do Not Track if they chose to do so."
>

I could agree with this.  I think the "if they chose to do so" could be left
off given that it's a SHOULD.

What form(s) would "appropriate notice" normally take?

--cw

Clay Webster
Associate Vice President, Platform Infrastructure
T 908-541-3724   F 908-575-7474
1200 Route 22 East, Bridgewater NJ 08807