Re: Evolving Online Privacy - Advancing User Choice

Thank you for this helpful clarification.

The requirements for consent to turn DNT on is: " A User Agent must 
obtain explicit, informed consent to turn on the DNT header " Can I 
assume that your proposal would require the same formulation for the 
granting of a user-granted exception: "A third party must obtain 
explicit, informed consent to obtain a user-granted exception to track 
despite the DNT:1 header"?

Justin Brookman
Director, Consumer Privacy
Center for Democracy&  Technology
1634 I Street NW, Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20006
tel 202.407.8812
fax 202.637.0969
justin@cdt.org
http://www.cdt.org
@CenDemTech
@JustinBrookman


On 6/20/2012 12:57 PM, Shane Wiley wrote:
>
> One editorial mistake discovered (there will probably be others).  In 
> the "Explicit and Separate User Choice" section, 4c should read:
>
> "Servers that respond to all DNT requests as non-compliant regardless 
> of User Agent details ARE NOT compliant with this recommendation."
>
> - Shane
>
> *From:*Shane Wiley
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 20, 2012 12:03 AM
> *To:* public-tracking@w3.org
> *Subject:* Evolving Online Privacy - Advancing User Choice
>
> TPWG,
>
> Please find attached the detailed proposal text we'll be reviewing 
> tomorrow afternoon (built upon the proposal outline I provided last week).
>
> The following individuals, companies, and trade associations 
> contributed to this proposal:
>
> Marc Groman & David Wainberg -- NAI
>
> Alan Chapell -- Chapell & Associates
>
> Heather West, Sean Harvey, & Ian Fette -- Google
>
> Shane Wiley -- Yahoo!
>
> There is considerable detail covering numerous topics in this proposal 
> and therefore it should not be consider an endorsement by all 
> contributors to all parts of this proposal.  That said, all 
> contributors generally agree with the direction and approach of this 
> document.
>
> We look forward to further discussion and fielding questions tomorrow 
> afternoon.
>
>
> Thank you,
> Shane
>