W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > October 2011

Re: Propose to drop from the strawman: ISSUE-93

From: David Wainberg <dwainberg@appnexus.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 14:07:34 -0400
Message-ID: <4EA84C66.1040609@appnexus.com>
To: Mike Zaneis <mike@iab.net>
CC: Jules Polonetsky <julespol@futureofprivacy.org>, "'Amy Colando (LCA)'" <acolando@microsoft.com>, 'Karl Dubost' <karld@opera.com>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
To put this in more stark terms, it is out of scope for this standard to 
implement controls on the pricing of digital content and services.

On 10/26/11 9:40 AM, Mike Zaneis wrote:
> 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.
>
Received on Wednesday, 26 October 2011 18:08:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:44:41 UTC