- From: Jules Polonetsky <julespol@futureofprivacy.org>
- Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 18:24:36 -0500
- To: "'Alan Chapell'" <achapell@chapellassociates.com>, "'Jeffrey Chester'" <jeff@democraticmedia.org>
- Cc: <public-tracking@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <000301cce6b8$d33d6990$79b83cb0$@futureofprivacy.org>
Here is a current example of users being paid for tracking http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/08/google-screenwise-project_n_1263128 .html?ref=tw From: Alan Chapell [mailto:achapell@chapellassociates.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 3:59 PM To: Jeffrey Chester Cc: public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org) Subject: Re: Issue 115, exemptions, best practices Jeff - If we're starting with the premise that any attempt to get a User to agree to an exemption is undermining User intent, we're going to have trouble finding common ground. Are there ANY mechanisms for providing a reward for the User's agreement to an exemption that are acceptable to you? What about providing additional free content in exchange for an exemption? Is that ok? Cheers, Alan Chapell Chapell & Associates 917 318 8440 From: Jeffrey Chester <jeff@democraticmedia.org> Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:50:09 -0500 To: Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com> Cc: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org> Subject: Re: Issue 115, exemptions, best practices Alan: As you know, online marketing practices are designed to process users to agree to opt-in and data practices. What I wrote below are just a few of the practices used by the leading co's and many others. If a users decision on DNT is not to be undermined, we must ensure that practices are incorporated the permit fair user choice. Jeffrey Chester Center for Digital Democracy 1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Suite 550 Washington, DC 20009 www.democraticmedia.org www.digitalads.org 202-986-2220 On Feb 8, 2012, at 3:23 PM, Alan Chapell wrote: Jeff - In looking at what you've provided here, I'm a bit concerned that you are dictating the terms that a website has with its visitors. Can you share the rationale for each of these - and specifically, what you are trying to guard against? Alternatively, I'm happy to have a one-off discussion on this topic on Friday early AM with Ninja and Jim. Cheers, Alan Chapell Chapell & Associates 917 318 8440 From: Jeffrey Chester <jeff@democraticmedia.org> Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:05:40 -0500 To: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org> Subject: Issue 115, exemptions, best practices Resent-From: <public-tracking@w3.org> Resent-Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 20:08:56 +0000 https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/115 [I await input from Ninja, Alan and Jim] Best Practices for sites to manage exemptions should include: A site must provide accurate information to users on the actual data collection and use practices of the site. This should include all information used for tracking, targeting, sales of profiles. A site should not suggest that the ability to access information is dependent on blanket acceptance of a site's data practices. A site should not use "immersive" multimedia applications designed to foster opt-in as a way to encourage a user agreeing to an exemption. A site should not use a special landing page that has been designed principally to convert a user to agree to permit an exemption. A site should not use social media marketing to urge a user to ask their "friends" to approve exemptions. A site should not offer rewards and incentives for a user to approve of an exemption.
Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2012 23:25:11 UTC