Re: ISSUE-5: What is the definition of tracking?

On 10/24/11 8:18 PM, Jonathan Mayer wrote:
> A few responding thoughts below.
> Jonathan
> I would strongly oppose limiting our definition of tracking to only 
> cover pseudonymously identified or personally identified data.  There 
> are a number of ways to track a user across websites without a single 
> pseudonymous or personal identifier.
I'm not sure what you mean here. Can you provide examples?
> I'm very sympathetic to wanting to discuss the policy motivations 
> underlying the definitions we establish.  But I'm concerned that, in 
> practice, the discussion would be a rat hole for the working group. 
>  There's just too much material to cover, and there are some 
> significant differences of opinion that would take far longer to iron 
> out in the general case than in the context of specific definitions. 
>  We trended towards an unproductive general policy conversation in 
> Cambridge, in some measure at my prompting; in retrospect I think the 
> co-chairs were wise to move on.
Hard != unproductive. This standard seems to be 10% tech and 90% policy. 
How will we develop rational policy without exploring the underlying 
policy rationale?
> I don't follow this point.  The first party vs. third party 
> distinction has, in my understanding, been an attempt to carefully 
> define the sort of organizational boundaries that give rise to privacy 
> concerns.  I haven't viewed the definition as a shortcut in any sense 
> - it does a lot of work.
Can you elaborate on how organizational boundaries give rise to privacy 
concerns? I'm not saying they don't; I'm genuinely interested to see it 
spelled out.

Received on Tuesday, 25 October 2011 21:14:11 UTC