- From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 22:46:54 +0200
- To: public-tracking@w3.org
- Cc: Kimon Zorbas <vp@iabeurope.eu>, Tamir Israel <tisrael@cippic.ca>, "rob@blaeu.com" <rob@blaeu.com>, "Vinay Goel (Adobe)" <vigoel@adobe.com>
Kimon, On Thursday 14 June 2012 20:00:11 Kimon Zorbas wrote: > However, the real question is: are we trying to agree on a legal > compliance instrument (for Europe)? As W3C we can not determine legal compliance. We can not achieve legal compliance. We can only give sites the tools to help them achieve legal compliance. So your concerns are prudent, but I don't think Rob is stepping on that territory. Even for the US market and compliance specification, this is the case. You have to claim compliance (yourself) and are then measured according to the Specification. Without your claim, no liability. The same for the tool. You can always chose not to use it. If the tool is really really useful, it will be a bad idea not to use it. But you can of course refuse to use it! To make a useful tool, we have to take the expectations of regulators into account (somewhat, there will be a second discussion on whether they will accept what we have done) And to get an indication of the regulators feelings, it doesn't hurt to learn about what their common stated opinion is. I actually learned a lot reading the opinion on cookies. It even contains an encouragement for us! For me this is huge after having been tared and feathered and chased out of Brussels during the P3P effort. So for me, the legal game is really apart from what we do here. The very existence of a tool will never make you compliant. But having a tool may allow both parties to find a compromise for smooth operations. We are creating the tool and companies and IAB Europe have to find the compromise with the respective relevant regulators. And you know better than I who they are and how that works. Rigo
Received on Thursday, 14 June 2012 20:47:21 UTC