W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > January 2012

Re: Exemptions and Exceptions...?

From: Jeffrey Chester <jeff@democraticmedia.org>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 13:09:19 -0500
Cc: John Simpson <john@consumerwatchdog.org>, Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Message-id: <AD9F6009-4F2F-4D33-AFB9-F9A8170CB6C2@democraticmedia.org>
To: Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
I also agree we need to provide specific language and rules on the exemptions.  (Hi Shane!.)   We can't just have a "general" when it implicates data collection based profiling methodologies.


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 Jan 30, 2012, at 1:03 PM, Shane Wiley wrote:

> John,
>  
> I agree and struggled to find a place in the specification where we have a true, 100% isolated “exemption” and the closest I could find was the “general” exemption for 1st parties (again, only “generally”).
>  
> - Shane
>  
> From: John Simpson [mailto:john@consumerwatchdog.org] 
> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 10:56 AM
> To: Shane Wiley
> Cc: Rigo Wenning; public-tracking@w3.org; David Singer
> Subject: Re: Exemptions and Exceptions...?
>  
> I agree with your understanding of the meaning of exempt and exception.  Nonetheless I'd be reluctant to say 1st parties are "exempt" from the DNT signal; they do have obligations. "Generally exempt" may be technically correct, but that usage may confuse things.  Better to spell out the obligations, I think: Can't share data with 1st parties, etc.
>  
>  
> On Jan 30, 2012, at 8:40 AM, Shane Wiley wrote:
> 
> 
> I thought just the opposite.
> 
> To be "exempt" from a rule means the rule never touches you.
> 
> An "exception" to the rule would mean the rule would typically apply but in this case there is an "exception".
> 
> In our context:
> 
> 1st parties are generally "exempt" from the DNT signal (and cannot share data with 3rd parties as a loop-hole to the exemption).
> 
> 3rd parties generally must not collect data when the DNT:1 signal is present but there are a few operational "exceptions" to this rule.
> 
> - Shane
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rigo Wenning [mailto:rigo@w3.org] 
> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 9:35 AM
> To: public-tracking@w3.org
> Cc: David Singer
> Subject: Re: Exemptions and Exceptions...?
> 
> David, 
> 
> I learned the distinction like this: 
> 
> general rule vs exception
> 
> a general obligation to do vs exemption
> 
> so: no obligation, no exemption
> but: a rule can create an obligation and the exemption would be an exception 
> to that rule. 
> 
> The first pair is more generic to me than the second pair..
> 
> But I'm not a native speaker... 
> 
> Best, 
> 
> Rigo
> 
> On Monday 30 January 2012 15:19:06 David Singer wrote:
> 
> This was raised briefly in conversation in Brussels.
>  
> Our documents and discussions use both words (Exemptions and Exceptions).  I
> think Aleecia has a clear idea of their difference, but I know we don't all
> share that clarity because I, at least, do not :-).
>  
> In my understanding, 'exemption' says that the requirements of our
> specification do not apply to some class of services .  An exception would
> be when the specification applies, but some class of services are excepted
> from some of the requirements.
>  
> Example from taxation:  some goods in the UK are exempt from Value Added
> Tax; the tax is inapplicable.  Some goods are zero-rated for Value Added
> Tax: they are subject to it in theory, but have an exception and are
> currently untaxed.
>  
>  
> I'm not sure we have many 'exempt' classes (services that, receiving a DNT
> signal, can ignore it, as it doesn't apply to them).  I think we mostly
> have exceptions.
>  
>  
> Aleecia, others, could you help clear my mind (and maybe others') on this?
>  
> Thanks!
>  
>  
>  
> David Singer
> Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>  
> 
>  
> ----------
> 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
> john@consumerwatchdog.org
>  


Received on Monday, 30 January 2012 18:10:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:38:30 UTC