Re: Today's call: summary on user agent compliance

Hi Tamir -

I think that's a laudable goal. However, the standard should not be looking
to address every possible regulatory issue at the expense of the core
mission of the group ­ which is to help define mechanisms for expressing
user preferences around Web tracking (as defined). That core mission may fit
really well into certain legal frameworks - and fit less well in other
frameworks. The uncertainty in certain jurisdictions makes this a difficult
proposition to say the least. I've heard respected EU privacy experts state
that ­ of the member states that have taken a public position on Section
5(3) of ePrivacy ­ half appear to be opt-in and half appear to be opt­out
for most cookies.  And the UK has arguably changed its stance on the cookie
issue several times since our group began its work ­ and for a time had one
branch of government saying something vastly different from another branch.

I recognize that some in the group may be more optimistic regarding the time
it would take to harmonize this standard across multiple jurisdictions. If
that's the consensus of the group, so be it. If so, we may want to more
clearly state this in the group's charter.


Cheers,

Alan Chapell
Chapell & Associates
917 318 8440


From:  Tamir Israel <tisrael@cippic.ca>
Date:  Monday, June 11, 2012 8:13 PM
To:  Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com>
Cc:  Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu>, <ifette@google.com>, Shane Wiley
<wileys@yahoo-inc.com>, Jeffrey Chester <jeff@democraticmedia.org>, Ninja
Marnau <nmarnau@datenschutzzentrum.de>, Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>, Bjoern
Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>,
"public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Subject:  Re: Today's call: summary on user agent compliance

    
 Hi Alan,
 
 Would it not be in the interests of all if this standard were able to take
into account as many regulatory problems for online trackers as possible?
 
 Best,
 Tamir
 
 On 6/11/2012 11:41 AM, Alan Chapell wrote:
> It seems to me that the group is spending a fair amount of time focusing on
> how DNT will provide a panacea to the legal uncertainty in the EU and now
> Canada. I'm not sure its a productive road for this group to be going down.
> DNT is unlikely to be the sole path to compliance in either the EU or Canada.