- From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2012 18:06:19 +0100
- To: public-tracking@w3.org
- Cc: Rob Sherman <robsherman@fb.com>
Rob and I had a nice discussion. I maintain that "common branding" and "user perception" are bad criteria to determine whether a party on a site is a first party. Imagine doubleclick now saying: "This lucky ad was brought to you by Doubleclick" in their banner. This would fit the criteria. On the other hand, I wasn't capable of coming up with something that would work (as I don't believe in 1st/3rd party distinction anyway, which is known). So while I may disagree, it is the best Rob and I could come up with. Thus no objection from my side to go ahead. Rigo On Wednesday 07 November 2012 16:18:24 Rob Sherman wrote: > This text reflects proposed text for Section 3.5.1.2.2, with a textual > change that I received and adding language to clarify the status of > "simple" web plugins. With this draft, I suggest that the status of > ACTION-273 be changed to "pending review." > > * * * > > 3.5.1.2.2 Multiple First Parties > > For many websites, there will be only one party that the average user would > expect to communicate with: the provider of the website the user has > visited. But, for other websites, users may expect to communicate with more > than one party. In these instances, a party will be deemed a first party > on a particular website if it concludes that a user would reasonably expect > to communicate with it using the website. > > URIs, branding, the presence of privacy policies or other disclosures that > specifically identify a party, and the extent to which a party provides > meaningful content or functionality on the website, may contribute to, but > are not necessarily determinative of, user perceptions about whether a > website is provided by more than one party. > > Example: Example Sports, a well-known sports league, collaborates with > Example Streaming, a well-known streaming video website, to provide content > on a sports-themed video streaming website. The website is prominently > advertised and branded as being provided by both Example Sports and > ExampleStreaming. An ordinary user who visits the website may recognize > that it isoperated by both Example Sports and Example Streaming. Both > Example Sports and Example Streaming are first parties. > > Example: Example Sports has a dedicated page on a Example Social, a social > networking website. The page is branded with both Example Sports’ name and > logo and Example Social’s name and logo. Both Example Sports’ name and > Example Social’s names appear in the URI for the page. When a user visits > this dedicated page, both Example Sports and Example Social are first > parties. > > Example: Example Fan Club operates a sports fan website that posts articles > about sports teams. Example Streaming provides an embeddable widget that > allows the display of a video from a sports game. Example Fan Club embeds > this widget at the bottom of one of its articles. The website does not > identify Example Streaming in the URI, includes no Example Streaming > branding, and does not refer to the Example Streaming privacy policy. The > only functionality that Example Streaming provides on the website is the > display of the video through its widget. Consistent with the standard > described in section 3.5.1.2.1, Example Fan Club is a first party and > Example Streaming is a third party. > > Rob Sherman > Facebook | Manager, Privacy and Public Policy > 1155 F Street, NW Suite 475 | Washington, DC 20004 > office 202.370.5147 | mobile 202.257.3901
Received on Wednesday, 7 November 2012 17:06:55 UTC