- From: Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 15:38:01 -0800
- To: John Simpson <john@consumerwatchdog.org>, Tom Lowenthal <tom@mozilla.com>
- CC: Bryan Sullivan <blsaws@gmail.com>, Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu>, JC Cannon <jccannon@microsoft.com>, "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <63294A1959410048A33AEE161379C8023D0C8AC13A@SP2-EX07VS02.ds.corp.yahoo.com>
I believe the first sentence is already covered elsewhere in the documents. Would it be okay to simply add this statement to existing preambles? "These requirements are not specific to behavioral advertising." This statement doesn't do a very good job of truly expressing the balance of focus though (primarily focused on OBA/profiling across sites, but also includes other cross site data collection as well). Perhaps not a material issue... - Shane From: John Simpson [mailto:john@consumerwatchdog.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2012 3:51 PM To: Tom Lowenthal Cc: Bryan Sullivan; Shane Wiley; Jonathan Mayer; JC Cannon; public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org) Subject: Re: Fate-sharing for ad behavioral targeting and other forms of personalization (ISSUE-36) Agree with Tom's proposed text. On Jan 31, 2012, at 4:53 PM, Tom Lowenthal wrote: ISSUE-36 Action-63 Proposed text: "This standard provides general requirements on data collection, use, and disclosure. These requirements are not specific to behavioral advertising." On 01/26/2012 07:29 PM, Bryan Sullivan wrote: I agree, either a direct statement such as suggested or "This standard does not single out any particular use of data for special treatment under DNT, other than the cases of specific exemption." But I like Shane's wording better. On 1/26/12 6:59 AM, "Shane Wiley" <wileys@yahoo-inc.com<mailto:wileys@yahoo-inc.com>> wrote: Then I would suggest state just that then: "The standard does not single out behavioral advertising for special treatment." -----Original Message----- From: Jonathan Mayer [mailto:jmayer@stanford.edu] Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 3:54 PM To: JC Cannon Cc: Shane Wiley; public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org> (public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org>) Subject: Re: Fate-sharing for ad behavioral targeting and other forms of personalization (ISSUE-36) This text is not intended to prohibit or allow anything. It only clarifies that the standard does not single out behavioral advertising for any special treatment. On Jan 26, 2012, at 3:44 PM, JC Cannon wrote: I agree with Shane. Personalization based on demographics or organizational membership could also be permitted. JC -----Original Message----- From: Shane Wiley [mailto:wileys@yahoo-inc.com] Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 6:27 AM To: Jonathan Mayer Cc: public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org> (public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org>) Subject: RE: Fate-sharing for ad behavioral targeting and other forms of personalization (ISSUE-36) I disagree with a general prohibition on any personalization based on DNT which the current text would suggest. For example, geo-location or context. -----Original Message----- From: Jonathan Mayer [mailto:jmayer@stanford.edu] Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 3:24 PM To: Shane Wiley Cc: public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org> (public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org>) Subject: Re: Fate-sharing for ad behavioral targeting and other forms of personalization (ISSUE-36) We haven't defined tracking in the document, and I see no reason to add a dependency here. On Jan 26, 2012, at 3:21 PM, Shane Wiley wrote: Friendly amendment: "This standard does not differentiate between personalization for advertisement targeting and other uses of personalization based on tracking." -----Original Message----- From: Jonathan Mayer [mailto:jmayer@stanford.edu] Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 3:13 PM To: public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org> (public-tracking@w3.org<mailto:public-tracking@w3.org>) Subject: Fate-sharing for ad behavioral targeting and other forms of personalization (ISSUE-36) Proposed text: "This standard does not differentiate between personalization for advertisement targeting and other uses of personalization." And making this issue CLOSED. ---------- John M. Simpson Consumer Advocate Consumer Watchdog 1750 Ocean Park Blvd. ,Suite 200 Santa Monica, CA,90405 Tel: 310-392-7041 Cell: 310-292-1902 www.ConsumerWatchdog.org<http://www.ConsumerWatchdog.org> john@consumerwatchdog.org<mailto:john@consumerwatchdog.org>
Received on Wednesday, 1 February 2012 23:39:14 UTC