- From: Mike Zaneis <mike@iab.net>
- Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 13:40:43 +0000
- To: Jules Polonetsky <julespol@futureofprivacy.org>, "'Amy Colando (LCA)'" <acolando@microsoft.com>, 'Karl Dubost' <karld@opera.com>, 'David Wainberg' <dwainberg@appnexus.com>
- CC: "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
I agree with Jules, Amy, and David on this point. Sorry to use the +1 but I do believe that the more input we get from participants the closer we will be to closing out certain issues. Just to push back on whether ISSUE-93 is out of scope or not, it seems strange to me that a W3C technical specification would provide "permissions" for basic business operations. A DNT "technical" standard that "allows" millions of businesses/publishers to offer their content and services in this way or that way seems fundamentally out of scope. Mike Zaneis SVP & General Counsel Interactive Advertising Bureau (202) 253-1466 Follow me on Twitter @mikezaneis -----Original Message----- From: public-tracking-request@w3.org [mailto:public-tracking-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jules Polonetsky Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 11:59 PM To: 'Amy Colando (LCA)'; 'Karl Dubost'; 'David Wainberg' Cc: public-tracking@w3.org Subject: RE: Propose to drop from the strawman: ISSUE-93 Note that a typical degrading effect might be the very common situation where a cookie is used to frequency cap at 1 time a pop-up or full page ad takeover. A site might allow its third party adserver to trigger a full page ad or pop up ad but insist that it happen only the first time an individual visits the site or no more than once a week. Yes, the site could work around and track in first party context, but they have outsourced all their adserving as most sites have. I can think of other examples where a third party cookie may be used for the individuals benefit - and where site work arounds are possible, but could easily be ignored by the site, especially if a small minority of users are affected. -----Original Message----- From: public-tracking-request@w3.org [mailto:public-tracking-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Amy Colando (LCA) Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 11:34 PM To: Karl Dubost; David Wainberg Cc: public-tracking@w3.org Subject: RE: Propose to drop from the strawman: ISSUE-93 +1 -----Original Message----- From: public-tracking-request@w3.org [mailto:public-tracking-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Karl Dubost Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 7:14 PM To: David Wainberg Cc: public-tracking@w3.org Subject: Re: Propose to drop from the strawman: ISSUE-93 Le 25 oct. 2011 à 17:17, David Wainberg a écrit : > ISSUE-93: Should 1st parties be able to degrade a user experience or charge money for content based on DNT (It appears in 6.1 of the Compliance and Scope doc.) > > This is well out of scope of this standard, and should be dropped from the strawman document. The DNT standard should be limited to particular cases of data collection and use. It's not the role of the standard to require businesses to require or suggest broad changes to a company's business practices (such as giving away content and services for free) that aren't directly related to implementation of the standard and handling of the relevant data. Seconded. That said, it is useful non normative comment for implementers. -- Karl Dubost - http://dev.opera.com/ Developer Relations & Tools, Opera Software
Received on Wednesday, 26 October 2011 13:41:38 UTC